Re: [tcpm] TCP SEQ validation (Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-gont-tcpm-tcp-seq-validation-02.txt)

I would think PS is the proper way – there is no experimenting with a buggy spec, and Fernando pointed out, that most stacks had fixed that particular bug in 793 for quite some while, right?

Richard

From: tcpm [mailto:tcpm-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Yoshifumi Nishida
Sent: Donnerstag, 26. März 2015 18:23
To: Fernando Gont
Cc: tcpm@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [tcpm] TCP SEQ validation (Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-gont-tcpm-tcp-seq-validation-02.txt)

Hi,
I would like to check people who are willing to support it also agree that this draft is published as a PS and it updates 793, or prefer other ways.
--
Yoshi

On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 12:03 PM, Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com<mailto:fgont@si6networks.com>> wrote:
Folks,

Thanks to some folks' push over time, and the fact that both co-authors
happened to find themselves at IETF 92, we've reposted our latests
version of this I-D (since the previous one had expired), in the hopes
of making progress.

Any comments on this rev will be appreciated. Additionally, I'll
repost/fwd Karen's latest comments on this I-D, which will be the basis
for the changes in the next rev.

Thanks!

Best regards,
Fernando

-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject: New Version Notification for
draft-gont-tcpm-tcp-seq-validation-02.txt
Date: Thu, 26 Mar 2015 11:55:46 -0700
From: internet-drafts@ietf.org<mailto:internet-drafts@ietf.org>
To: Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com<mailto:fgont@si6networks.com>>, David Borman
<david.borman@quantum.com<mailto:david.borman@quantum.com>>, Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com<mailto:fgont@si6networks.com>>, David
Borman <david.borman@quantum.com<mailto:david.borman@quantum.com>>

A new version of I-D, draft-gont-tcpm-tcp-seq-validation-02.txt
has been successfully submitted by Fernando Gont and posted to the
IETF repository.

Name:           draft-gont-tcpm-tcp-seq-validation
Revision:       02
Title:          On the Validation of TCP Sequence Numbers
Document date:  2015-03-26
Group:          Individual Submission
Pages:          16
URL:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-gont-tcpm-tcp-seq-validation-02.txt
Status:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-gont-tcpm-tcp-seq-validation/
Htmlized:
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-gont-tcpm-tcp-seq-validation-02
Diff:
http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-gont-tcpm-tcp-seq-validation-02

Abstract:
   When TCP receives packets that lie outside of the receive window, the
   corresponding packets are dropped and either an ACK, RST or no
   response is generated due to the out-of-window packet, with no
   further processing of the packet.  Most of the time, this works just
   fine and TCP remains stable, especially when a TCP connection has
   unidirectional data flow.  However, there are three scenarios in
   which packets that are outside of the receive window should still
   have their ACK field processed, or else a packet war will take place.
   The aforementioned issues have affected a number of popular TCP
   implementations, typically leading to connection failures, system
   crashes, or other undesirable behaviors.  This document describes the
   three scenarios in which the aforementioned issues might arise, and
   formally updates RFC 793 such that these potential problems are
   mitigated.

Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission
until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org<http://tools.ietf.org>.

The IETF Secretariat

_______________________________________________
tcpm mailing list
tcpm@ietf.org<mailto:tcpm@ietf.org>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpm