Re: [mpls] [MPLS] HELP: Need your opinion on LDP security
"Rajiv Asati (rajiva)" <rajiva@cisco.com> Tue, 02 November 2010 12:02 UTC
Return-Path: <rajiva@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 873FC28C12A for <mpls@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 2 Nov 2010 05:02:57 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
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 I7uc9Z55pjAj for <mpls@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 2 Nov 2010 05:02:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rtp-iport-1.cisco.com (rtp-iport-1.cisco.com [64.102.122.148]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3D73828C130 for <mpls@ietf.org>; Tue, 2 Nov 2010 05:02:55 -0700 (PDT)
Authentication-Results: rtp-iport-1.cisco.com; dkim=neutral (message not signed) header.i=none
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Av0EANSaz0ytJV2b/2dsb2JhbACDHp1qYHGjOooukVKBIoMwcwSEV4kMgmY
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.58,281,1286150400"; d="scan'208";a="177468042"
Received: from rcdn-core-4.cisco.com ([173.37.93.155]) by rtp-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 02 Nov 2010 12:02:58 +0000
Received: from xbh-rcd-201.cisco.com (xbh-rcd-201.cisco.com [72.163.62.200]) by rcdn-core-4.cisco.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id oA2C2wt5016311; Tue, 2 Nov 2010 12:02:58 GMT
Received: from xmb-rcd-111.cisco.com ([72.163.62.153]) by xbh-rcd-201.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Tue, 2 Nov 2010 07:02:58 -0500
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2010 07:02:56 -0500
Message-ID: <067E6CE33034954AAC05C9EC85E2577C03551A72@XMB-RCD-111.cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <B26691BEDACE4E5E94CCE75B1EBCE8E4@m55527c>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: [mpls] [MPLS] HELP: Need your opinion on LDP security
Thread-Index: Act31J0rVTQEbE13RIuj4dyexPD2DwCsNrnA
References: <AANLkTi=uX6aGxbXgdgyzyeijjxuuBJ2uiT4xCUPwbmAT@mail.gmail.com> <FA2A0931F083430E99887FC81734A3C1@kaixinmachPC> <AANLkTinkiF7C7nvHFyO35j2NEfKD=YDfZDVCkGbApMxi@mail.gmail.com> <13205C286662DE4387D9AF3AC30EF456B02161BADD@EMBX01-WF.jnpr.net> <17309A813C1D48629621DC2F29FADD65@m55527c> <067E6CE33034954AAC05C9EC85E2577C034CEA12@XMB-RCD-111.cisco.com> <A6369D0912094088B61CD3974BA483A1@m55527c> <067E6CE33034954AAC05C9EC85E2577C034CF275@XMB-RCD-111.cisco.com> <B26691BEDACE4E5E94CCE75B1EBCE8E4@m55527c>
From: "Rajiv Asati (rajiva)" <rajiva@cisco.com>
To: Mach Chen <mach@huawei.com>, Ronald Bonica <rbonica@juniper.net>, Vishwas Manral <vishwas.ietf@gmail.com>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 02 Nov 2010 12:02:58.0953 (UTC) FILETIME=[E44AAF90:01CB7A85]
Cc: mpls@ietf.org, Lamberto Sterling <lamberto.sterling@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [mpls] [MPLS] HELP: Need your opinion on LDP security
X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG <mpls.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls>, <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/mpls>
List-Post: <mailto:mpls@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls>, <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2010 12:02:57 -0000
Hi Mach, > In addition, in case of LDP is not enabled on the edge devices, even if the > LDP implementation can do source address and UDP port check, then the > spoofing hellos will not be blocked at the edge devices by LDP, unless you If LDP is not enabled on an interface, then link hello must not be accepted on that interface. Otherwise, it is a violation of RFC 5036 section 3.5.2.1. It is orthogonal to whether the hellos are spoofed or not. Cheers, Rajiv > -----Original Message----- > From: Mach Chen [mailto:mach@huawei.com] > Sent: Friday, October 29, 2010 9:49 PM > To: Rajiv Asati (rajiva); Ronald Bonica; Vishwas Manral > Cc: mpls@ietf.org; Lamberto Sterling > Subject: Re: [mpls] [MPLS] HELP: Need your opinion on LDP security > > Hi Rajiv, > > Thanks for your prompt response! > > Please see inline... > -------------------------------------------------- > From: "Rajiv Asati (rajiva)" <rajiva@cisco.com> > Sent: Friday, October 29, 2010 9:44 PM > To: "Mach Chen" <mach@huawei.com>; "Ronald Bonica" <rbonica@juniper.net>; > "Vishwas Manral" <vishwas.ietf@gmail.com> > Cc: <mpls@ietf.org>; "Lamberto Sterling" <lamberto.sterling@gmail.com> > Subject: RE: [mpls] [MPLS] HELP: Need your opinion on LDP security > > > Hi Mach, > > > > Pls see inline, > > > >> > As far as network boundary/edge is concerned, if LDP is not enabled on > >> > the > >> > outside interfaces, then the implementation should allow any LDP packet > >> > (IP packet with UDP/TCP port=646) to be ignored. This should not > >> > require > >> > any filtering. > >> > > >> Not all the implmentations will do such check and drop the LDP packets > >> (Target hello) , and I know there are at least two implmentations do not > >> do > >> this. > > > > Aah!! Such an implementation would be susceptible to a bigger DoS attack, > > IMO. > > > > It is a bad idea to accept and process a packet on a port/socket whose > > protocol is not enabled yet. > > > > In fact, that's a violation of RFC 5036 section 3.5.2.1 > > > > <excerpt> > > A Link Hello is acceptable if the interface on which it was > > received has been configured for label switching. > > > > A Targeted Hello from source address A is acceptable if either: > > > > - The LSR has been configured to accept Targeted Hellos, or > > - The LSR has been configured to send Targeted Hellos to A. > > </excerpt> > > Recently, we did experiments in lab and found that the result of most of the > major implmentations are alike on this. Actually, this does not violate the > rules for Targeted Hello as you excerpted. If an LSR has established a > Target session with A, it should have been configured to accept/send > Targeted Hellos from/to A, and a spoofing Hello can easily to be made up as > if sending from A. > > > > > > > > >> In addition, in case of LDP is enabled on the outside interfaces, then > >> you > >> can't lie on such mechanism. > > > > Ditto. If LDP is enabled (for things such as Inter-AS), then the problem > > may happen. > > Yes, this one of the scenarios that the draft tries to solve. > > In addition, in case of LDP is not enabled on the edge devices, even if the > LDP implementation can do source address and UDP port check, then the > spoofing hellos will not be blocked at the edge devices by LDP, unless you > configure the other necessay filtering rules on the edges. > > Best regards, > Mach
- [mpls] [MPLS] HELP: Need your opinion on LDP secu… Vero Zheng
- Re: [mpls] [MPLS] HELP: Need your opinion on LDP … Eric Rosen
- Re: [mpls] [MPLS] HELP: Need your opinion on LDP … Mallette, Edwin
- Re: [mpls] [MPLS] HELP: Need your opinion on LDP … Vero Zheng
- Re: [mpls] [MPLS] HELP: Need your opinion on LDP … Vero Zheng
- Re: [mpls] [MPLS] HELP: Need your opinion on LDP … Vishwas Manral
- Re: [mpls] [MPLS] HELP: Need your opinion on LDP … Vero Zheng
- Re: [mpls] [MPLS] HELP: Need your opinion on LDP … Mach Chen
- Re: [mpls] [MPLS] HELP: Need your opinion on LDP … Lamberto Sterling
- Re: [mpls] [MPLS] HELP: Need your opinion on LDP … Mach Chen
- Re: [mpls] [MPLS] HELP: Need your opinion on LDP … Vishwas Manral
- Re: [mpls] [MPLS] HELP: Need your opinion on LDP … Ronald Bonica
- Re: [mpls] [MPLS] HELP: Need your opinion on LDP … Thomas Morin
- Re: [mpls] [MPLS] HELP: Need your opinion on LDP … Mach Chen
- Re: [mpls] [MPLS] HELP: Need your opinion on LDP … Vero Zheng
- Re: [mpls] [MPLS] HELP: Need your opinion on LDP … Mach Chen
- Re: [mpls] [MPLS] HELP: Need your opinion on LDP … Dave Katz
- Re: [mpls] [MPLS] HELP: Need your opinion on LDP … Eric Rosen
- Re: [mpls] [MPLS] HELP: Need your opinion on LDP … Rajiv Asati (rajiva)
- Re: [mpls] [MPLS] HELP: Need your opinion on LDP … Mach Chen
- Re: [mpls] [MPLS] HELP: Need your opinion on LDP … Vero Zheng
- Re: [mpls] [MPLS] HELP: Need your opinion on LDP … lizhong.jin
- Re: [mpls] [MPLS] HELP: Need your opinion on LDP … Mach Chen
- Re: [mpls] [MPLS] HELP: Need your opinion on LDP … lizhong.jin
- Re: [mpls] [MPLS] HELP: Need your opinion on LDP … Eric Rosen
- Re: [mpls] [MPLS] HELP: Need your opinion on LDP … Vero Zheng
- Re: [mpls] [MPLS] HELP: Need your opinion on LDP … Rajiv Asati (rajiva)
- Re: [mpls] [MPLS] HELP: Need your opinion on LDP … iLya
- Re: [mpls] [MPLS] HELP: Need your opinion on LDP … Nitin Bahadur
- Re: [mpls] [MPLS] HELP: Need your opinion on LDP … Adrian Farrel
- Re: [mpls] [MPLS] HELP: Need your opinion on LDP … Mach Chen
- Re: [mpls] [MPLS] HELP: Need your opinion on LDP … Vero Zheng
- Re: [mpls] [MPLS] HELP: Need your opinion on LDP … Eric Gray
- Re: [mpls] [MPLS] HELP: Need your opinion on LDP … Vero Zheng
- Re: [mpls] [MPLS] HELP: Need your opinion on LDP … Rajiv Asati (rajiva)
- Re: [mpls] [MPLS] HELP: Need your opinion on LDP … Rajiv Asati (rajiva)