[MEXT] [RFC3375bis] Expected BU format and processing / associated impacts

arno@natisbad.org (Arnaud Ebalard) Mon, 01 December 2008 05:41 UTC

Return-Path: <mext-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: monami6-archive@megatron.ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-monami6-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D3CE33A691C; Sun, 30 Nov 2008 21:41:32 -0800 (PST)
X-Original-To: mext@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mext@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E6143A691C for <mext@core3.amsl.com>; Sun, 30 Nov 2008 21:41:31 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.149
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.149 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.450, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 7snOAcoKHDME for <mext@core3.amsl.com>; Sun, 30 Nov 2008 21:41:30 -0800 (PST)
Received: from copper.chdir.org (copper.chdir.org [88.191.97.87]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8578D3A6813 for <mext@ietf.org>; Sun, 30 Nov 2008 21:41:30 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [2001:7a8:78df:2:20d:93ff:fe55:8f78] (helo=localhost.localdomain) by copper.chdir.org with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from <arno@natisbad.org>) id 1L71X9-0002nh-2U; Mon, 01 Dec 2008 06:41:23 +0100
X-Hashcash: 1:20:081201:mext@ietf.org::6QDaIZxi3U16vwYk:00004C66
X-Hashcash: 1:20:081201:whaddad@qualcomm.com::3FUAHkChOnVVgJ1n:000000000000000000000000000000000000000002FFw
From: arno@natisbad.org (Arnaud Ebalard)
To: IETF MEXT WG ML <mext@ietf.org>
X-PGP-Key-URL: http://natisbad.org/arno@natisbad.org.asc
X-Fingerprint: 47EB 85FE B99A AB85 FD09 46F3 0255 957C 047A 5026
Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2008 21:39:22 -0800
Message-ID: <87y6z0e9o5.fsf@natisbad.org>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.110009 (No Gnus v0.9) Emacs/22.2 (gnu/linux)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: [MEXT] [RFC3375bis] Expected BU format and processing / associated impacts
X-BeenThere: mext@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Mobile IPv6 EXTensions WG <mext.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mext>, <mailto:mext-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/pipermail/mext>
List-Post: <mailto:mext@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:mext-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mext>, <mailto:mext-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: mext-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: mext-bounces@ietf.org

Hi,

First, sorry for the late post, just before the deadline (Dec 05).

While studying the impacts of MIPv6 Home Link Detection mechanism in
IPsec environments [1], I spent some time carefully rereading the
associated reference documents (3775, 3776, 4877, ...).

>From that reading, I came to the conclusion that the various possible
formats allowed for the BU (when on a foreign network, at home, for
deregistration or not, ...) and the way BU should be processed by the HA
leave room for interoperability issues and possibly threats. This
includes handling of AltCoA option and also HAO/RH2. 

I think the spec is too lose on those topics and rfc3775bis could be a
good opportunity to make things clearer/tighter for implementors on
*some* of those points. 

[1] is a work in progress (read 'raw material'), extracted from a bigger
document, which explains the unusual format (pdf) and the fact I have
currently not found the time to perform some of the tests I intend to do
(on existing implementations). Read it with some salt.

Anyway, I'd be interested if some among you could take a look at the
document and see if some of the points raised could be handled in the
context of rfc377bis (appendices contains the interesting quotes from
the reference documents).

Better stated explicitly: I don't expect the "Home Link Detection threat
in IPsec environment" topic covered in the doc to be discussed or solved
in the context of rfc3775bis.

Comments welcome,

Cheers,

a+

[1]: http://rfc.1924.fr/ipsec-hld-threats.pdf
_______________________________________________
MEXT mailing list
MEXT@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mext