IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Ntp] Comments on Miroslav's NTP v5 proposal.

Daniel Franke <dfoxfranke@gmail.com> Mon, 16 November 2020 23:17 UTC

Return-Path: <dfoxfranke@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: ntp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ntp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 616433A16C7 for <ntp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 16 Nov 2020 15:17:40 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.099
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 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_FROM=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-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 vr0aHaSJIG_Z for <ntp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 16 Nov 2020 15:17:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-yb1-xb2c.google.com (mail-yb1-xb2c.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::b2c]) (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 2F4EB3A16A6 for <ntp@ietf.org>; Mon, 16 Nov 2020 15:17:38 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-yb1-xb2c.google.com with SMTP id o71so16912829ybc.2 for <ntp@ietf.org>; Mon, 16 Nov 2020 15:17:38 -0800 (PST)
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=LRzbTr7ngFOoOq7wEXtmxbPUzImLnD3j1KTJmFmreDU=; b=LAKSlFBbk4jlXAZeH2e5E6PiHyRimfXcgfcqEwZPrkSEVWYYcxQUzrdB1vW1SuLkY4 t/d6F1BibQxnAA1bYvPvjNnp0yiBf1ep8qBOX8qagApXmq7KR+n3mRiR21sdyNrbUaWr LW08tECbmXJIXCY/DsREQ5jUrjwJc+d2wXIm0UIxeYwIuRGmc5h5CzeGrb17uJ+dHQHs P53MyT9HCd4z6WwjNuvqwSQAJ2tJAU7iNuCV8S8VrxgqI/jqjqid2+4ZPSjh1KhFjgWx LLkksHL4leDa6krUZkYMzMMMubCdx5X11AHd4oAKw0DBKXcfUsHt99HVoFvX1dSZTjIg uc4Q==
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=LRzbTr7ngFOoOq7wEXtmxbPUzImLnD3j1KTJmFmreDU=; b=p4cYd0AZQca01hM6NOVOp5HVRGqqZaNN13oGgn0GJ7RokdoW2x891frU5aot42DbaM b9UBa86uGzzGH8nFiSptniA2ABCDjMQm/kTzET5S2CA7Nqi2IqG5O82bbhqxcBIGzsU+ 6wCZcrgAsXEZe4i9qMG1w8MKWmb+JVdhZJDzXv/yEqhYZnfd/Gviqy5QtD8qPQZrizkB HTZmuHpMMB8f/r1eOrbT0QlDmvxiKjHY8DGGh+xep25PSZnv5EPL2oqXe2SdwlG4mBl1 f1jUYa4ORi6D65Uw3R009dpwvyg0CwbRM36Jp3MBldSQq5O2iZnLIKDsgi9MfoAkh2jQ FACA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5336LD6tJOVCZv8RsI6MAPBEuXTp632fQ9IpGhgR8T26dRx/q3Ky cYslnsu0Z/GVBasCj5r2qRy2Mzifx+aD1LcPSEM=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJy+JqU8gfpStKp/3qwI5eBtjBaVWoIQMdImiyhzCf7H/oeamxNGzo8iKIAUkuRoAQMd6kSxoEZwARo0tk5qN6o=
X-Received: by 2002:a25:390:: with SMTP id 138mr11092468ybd.428.1605568658238; Mon, 16 Nov 2020 15:17:38 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CACsn0cn8ULX5f_PQVbDsrirPnGHVPWGgMqXn52n_T4P5ELkKgQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CACsn0cn8ULX5f_PQVbDsrirPnGHVPWGgMqXn52n_T4P5ELkKgQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Daniel Franke <dfoxfranke@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 18:17:27 -0500
Message-ID: <CAJm83bBGonfz3CLH3U9XnBCnu3TP=MwrMQeacEGRNbOxfNzOXg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Watson Ladd <watsonbladd@gmail.com>
Cc: NTP WG <ntp@ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ntp/TzcSKWggzF3Ja7URnDHH572wgR0>
Subject: Re: [Ntp] Comments on Miroslav's NTP v5 proposal.
X-BeenThere: ntp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: <ntp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ntp>, <mailto:ntp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ntp/>
List-Post: <mailto:ntp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ntp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ntp>, <mailto:ntp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 23:17:46 -0000

On Mon, Nov 16, 2020 at 2:35 AM Watson Ladd <watsonbladd@gmail.com> wrote:

> Bloom filters of addresses to prevent loops have a problem: if the
> synchronization tree traverses two RFC 1918 hosts in different
> networks, the Bloom fIlter will have a false positive.

My earlier design sketch
https://gist.github.com/dfoxfranke/4ca0443b6ff6e0473578cf3827b9ea7f
goes into more detail on the Bloom filter idea. It's based on random
self-assigned identifiers, not on IP addresses.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email