Re: I-D ACTION:draft-jabley-ipv6-rh0-is-evil-00.txt

Le 11 mai 07 à 07:52, David Malone a écrit :

> On Fri, May 11, 2007 at 11:16:49AM +0900, JINMEI Tatuya / ?$B?@L@C#:H
> wrote:
>> I believe we should rather return an ICMPv6 error.  Even if we decide
>> to deprecate type0 RH, there will be many non-updated systems for a
>> certain period of time.  Since there is at least one know popular  
>> (but
>> non-attacking) usage of RH0, i.e., probing 'return path' by
>> traceroute, we'll still see non-attacking packets containing RH0.  It
>> would be better to notice such innocent but not just well-informed
>> users explicitly, rather than simply dropping the packet.
>
> I buy this argument in favour of returning an error. I guess that
> means we should select an error type which is usefully displayed
> by (some/most/all?) versions of traceroute6?

If you go for that, then an ICMP Parameter Problem, Code 0, message
pointing to the unrecognized routing type seems reasonable.

a+

-- Arnaud Ebalard
EADS Innovation Works - IT Sec Research Engineer
PGP KeyID:047A5026 FingerPrint:47EB85FEB99AAB85FD0946F30255957C047A5026

--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
ipv6@ietf.org
Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------