Re: [P2PSIP] Re: HIP pros and cons

[Miika Komu <[e-mail]>]

On Tue, 18 Dec 2007, Eric Rescorla wrote:

Eric,

> At Tue, 18 Dec 2007 19:45:49 +0200 (EET),
> Miika Komu wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, 18 Dec 2007, Brian Rosen wrote:
>>
>> Hi Brian,
>>
>> thanks for the feedback. It seems like the alternative b is mandatory for
>> p2p-sip. Otherwise, then I don't see how you are going to avoid the use of
>> cryptographic certificates without compromising dht identifier security
>> and revocation.
>>
>> In alternative b, it is still possible to use host generated dht key
>> identifiers.
>
> Again, not if you want to use them as the locations in the DHT,
> because then you get chosen location attacks.

Yes but it costs. I don't see the difference here with host vs. enrollment 
server generated keys because the end-host can enroll several times until 
it is satisfied with the id. What makes the difference is the cost.

Since I took the time to describe a detailed, step-by-step approach with 
host generated identifiers, could you do the same with enrollment 
server generated keys? Thanks.

P.S. If you want to reference some work, please give the authors and 
titles to the publication or URL instead of some acronyms. Thanks.

-- 
Miika Komu                                       http://www.iki.fi/miika/

_______________________________________________
P2PSIP mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/p2psip