Re: [tcpm] comments on draft-ietf-tcpm-icmp-attacks-05

Joe Touch <touch@ISI.EDU> Fri, 12 June 2009 20:41 UTC

Return-Path: <touch@ISI.EDU>
X-Original-To: tcpm@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tcpm@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D72D3A68EB for <tcpm@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 12 Jun 2009 13:41:25 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599]
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 qCRpIdCmlzq5 for <tcpm@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 12 Jun 2009 13:41:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from vapor.isi.edu (vapor.isi.edu [128.9.64.64]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 27FF63A68BC for <tcpm@ietf.org>; Fri, 12 Jun 2009 13:41:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [75.213.50.109] (109.sub-75-213-50.myvzw.com [75.213.50.109]) by vapor.isi.edu (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n5CKf4YI028383; Fri, 12 Jun 2009 13:41:07 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <4A32BD5F.5030503@isi.edu>
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2009 13:41:03 -0700
From: Joe Touch <touch@ISI.EDU>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.21 (Windows/20090302)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Fernando Gont <fernando@gont.com.ar>
References: <C304DB494AC0C04C87C6A6E2FF5603DB221796D53C@NDJSSCC01.ndc.nasa.gov> <4A30BED6.3050308@gont.com.ar>
In-Reply-To: <4A30BED6.3050308@gont.com.ar>
X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.7
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-ISI-4-43-8-MailScanner: Found to be clean
X-MailScanner-From: touch@isi.edu
Cc: "tcpm@ietf.org" <tcpm@ietf.org>, Fernando Gont <fernando.gont@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [tcpm] comments on draft-ietf-tcpm-icmp-attacks-05
X-BeenThere: tcpm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: TCP Maintenance and Minor Extensions Working Group <tcpm.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpm>, <mailto:tcpm-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/tcpm>
List-Post: <mailto:tcpm@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tcpm-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpm>, <mailto:tcpm-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2009 20:41:25 -0000

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1



Fernando Gont wrote:
...
>> 5) (general) Section 5.1, last paragraph, it
>> seems like we should be mentioning TCP-AO as
>> well here, though I don't think it changes any
>> part of the claim.
> 
> Agreed. Maybe this is also an indication that TCP-AO *should* change
> something in this respect!

TCP-AO already addresses ICMP attacks in the security considerations
section, and requires there to be a way to disable reaction to ICMPs.
Like IPsec, though, we don't make a-priori assessments as to whether
ICMPs should be blocked or not on connections on which TCP-AO (or IPsec)
is used.

Joe
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iEYEARECAAYFAkoyvV8ACgkQE5f5cImnZruTxACeO2Q8KULcvKQOK07tBxmHiPNa
Gr0An1RGq74/6xx4XlQ1Sz3XcvGwGuEU
=aMxa
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----