Re: Ambiguity
Fred Baker <fbaker@acc.com> Fri, 13 August 1993 20:53 UTC
Received: from ietf.nri.reston.va.us by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa15183; 13 Aug 93 16:53 EDT
Received: from CNRI.RESTON.VA.US by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa15179; 13 Aug 93 16:53 EDT
Received: from atlas.xylogics.com by CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa27730; 13 Aug 93 16:53 EDT
Received: by atlas.xylogics.com id AA03775 (5.65c/UK-2.1-930726); Fri, 13 Aug 1993 16:56:09 -0400
Received: from SAFFRON.ACC.COM by atlas.xylogics.com with SMTP id AA26938 (5.65c/UK-2.1-930726); Fri, 13 Aug 1993 16:56:00 -0400
Received: by saffron.acc.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA04894; Fri, 13 Aug 93 13:52:07 PDT
Date: Fri, 13 Aug 1993 13:52:07 -0700
Sender: ietf-archive-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US
From: Fred Baker <fbaker@acc.com>
Message-Id: <9308132052.AA04894@saffron.acc.com>
To: ietf-rip@xylogics.com
Subject: Re: Ambiguity
>> - If a RIP2 router is not configured to do authentication and an >> authenticated packet arrives, should the packet be dropped or >> should the authentication be ignored? For simple password, >> either can be done; however, if an encryption were added, the >> packet would have to be dropped since decryption could not be done. >> Therefore, I think authenticated packets should be dropped if the >> router is not doing authentication. >> >> - Similarly, if an authenticated packet arrives at a router which is >> doing authentication, but does not support the indicated auth type, >> the packet should be dropped. I concur; if somebody thinks things are getting authenticated, that should not be hot-wired for any reason.
- Ambiguity Gary Scott Malkin
- Re: Ambiguity Fred Baker