Re: Roman Danyliw's No Objection on draft-ietf-6man-grand-05: (with COMMENT)

Jen Linkova <furry13@gmail.com> Wed, 30 June 2021 08:00 UTC

Return-Path: <furry13@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B9A0C3A11F8; Wed, 30 Jun 2021 01:00:20 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.848
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.848 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id jKb9utuxIQpT; Wed, 30 Jun 2021 01:00:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qt1-x834.google.com (mail-qt1-x834.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::834]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 19FD93A11F6; Wed, 30 Jun 2021 01:00:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-qt1-x834.google.com with SMTP id y9so847067qtx.9; Wed, 30 Jun 2021 01:00:15 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=hm3fHaGI3JsniecvN55H3RvvXqK5F/C3DAfv2K7GGo4=; b=fC5SZx6EfDHDTb45AbzVswOuibFmtqu68nw5in5Bog3dN9B/yjYFQkV6f5+PLetxUj zHJSHevo2TZ4Zsn4lAUOcm49h8i5tWruiKoMLfMZRXQ7EOTmJ7tDR18Z8qmwkfhGFeCm gWotuJNFRzyWbHv0NQKi0Q3tGtSC5ur6iHXprOca0WwpBjsy31ITHC0tklQEDji/GTHX 3MW5NlqBel/EU6Y05LNGwJhqP6+kPgnTuHWTPnmYmI4L1vGLqguwv7GPGajgER9SKomh unU6UViaaaJ7SXE41FEed8b1UCyifoJEfpfbnhq2WA7QtwIb5eBITFeA+xGiGlo0yp5V QGWg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=hm3fHaGI3JsniecvN55H3RvvXqK5F/C3DAfv2K7GGo4=; b=GjX8PMH76Lr8YQXsp/joVc8n5fDUi1x0A0zJ/hNVbiyb4pE9/j4U0gmxeazb3KEQa2 m3v04ICrlMRrzlfUALDFSLPN28WxNxgz3edQW+w5H06qlYmqC7s64+IiSwnkJYdl9FhW VPJSr1JCajVB5MjotE70/n9bTiFqW7UEBrFE2FgufwAxTVkT0e+r7frpbTiqBOc/b3ds kNZlKn0pIPGganlMjnTanyUDYW39h8DWVa3dVMxGxZnaRagmCMzG5H32FyX6OQ5GUtHE LLg2GvmzY1q4KTFe8n36nyWW3oPtlhNdmgj3q3quRPilnxw8mvccm+58NNpk3R7qFfuO F+LA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530MxBubjmLXrVryM0Z/x/3P414YaTtx+FNnar7rvTdHiqjhZDeK dVsan3nZ8ltF0ibxeF1oXXW06PzrqKmmSdidbZw=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxbblKvMwvw/O+3KHhAATJUvLB+D9GW3sL9xjQF3CtgC/yzVhQH+UzcTTPCo25yLj7BAc6Lkjjymbp/FtYheuc=
X-Received: by 2002:a05:622a:1389:: with SMTP id o9mr1297108qtk.52.1625040013509; Wed, 30 Jun 2021 01:00:13 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <162499947316.30290.5641150795576278677@ietfa.amsl.com>
In-Reply-To: <162499947316.30290.5641150795576278677@ietfa.amsl.com>
From: Jen Linkova <furry13@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2021 18:00:02 +1000
Message-ID: <CAFU7BASzMC5MJUPfDZjhXfHkQeiwvK-MFjT+hUPXi9U4sRVy_A@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Roman Danyliw's No Objection on draft-ietf-6man-grand-05: (with COMMENT)
To: Roman Danyliw <rdd@cert.org>
Cc: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com>, draft-ietf-6man-grand@ietf.org, 6man <ipv6@ietf.org>, 6man Chairs <6man-chairs@ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/IHOEz-zIQ7dyhC0ZeUhkjDWCm7w>
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "IPv6 Maintenance Working Group \(6man\)" <ipv6.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ipv6/>
List-Post: <mailto:ipv6@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2021 08:00:21 -0000

Hi Roman,

On Wed, Jun 30, 2021 at 6:45 AM Roman Danyliw via Datatracker
<noreply@ietf.org> wrote:
> ** Section 5.3.  Does the outcome of any of the documented scenarios change if
> the host has DAD turned off (per Section 5.3.1, Step #4 and Section 5.3.2, Step
> #5)

I've added the following text to the end of the section 5;
"The analysis assumes that the host performs Duplicate Address
Detection, as section 5.4 of [RFC4862] requires that DAD MUST be
performed on all unicast addresses prior to assigning them to an
interface."

> ** Section 10.  It would be useful to reiterate with a back reference the
> unlikely, but possible condition where the duplicated address temporarily gets
> the traffic from the rightful owner (noted in Section 5.3.2).

I've added the following text, please let me know if it doesn't
address your concern:

"Section 5 describes some corner cases when a host with the duplicated
Optimistic address might get some packets intended for the rightful
owner of the address. However such scenarios do not introduce any new
attack vectors: even without the proposed changes, an attacker can
easily override the routers neighbor cache and redirect the traffic by
sending NAs with the Solicited flag set."


-- 
SY, Jen Linkova aka Furry