IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

"Eddy, Wesley M. (GRC-MS00)[Verizon]" <wesley.m.eddy@nasa.gov> Thu, 11 June 2009 04:45 UTC

Return-Path: <wesley.m.eddy@nasa.gov>
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 17A6C3A6D2B for <tcpm@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 10 Jun 2009 21:45:48 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.49
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.49 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.109, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
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 9fCV8J-R4gZJ for <tcpm@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 10 Jun 2009 21:45:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ndjsnpf03.ndc.nasa.gov (ndjsnpf03.ndc.nasa.gov [198.117.1.123]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B8D6B3A6D1E for <tcpm@ietf.org>; Wed, 10 Jun 2009 21:45:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ndjsppt02.ndc.nasa.gov (ndjsppt02.ndc.nasa.gov [198.117.1.101]) by ndjsnpf03.ndc.nasa.gov (Postfix) with ESMTP id A45362D861E; Wed, 10 Jun 2009 23:45:53 -0500 (CDT)
Received: from ndjshub01.ndc.nasa.gov (ndjshub01.ndc.nasa.gov [198.117.4.160]) by ndjsppt02.ndc.nasa.gov (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id n5B4jrss005933; Wed, 10 Jun 2009 23:45:53 -0500
Received: from NDJSSCC01.ndc.nasa.gov ([198.117.4.166]) by ndjshub01.ndc.nasa.gov ([198.117.4.160]) with mapi; Wed, 10 Jun 2009 23:45:53 -0500
From: "Eddy, Wesley M. (GRC-MS00)[Verizon]" <wesley.m.eddy@nasa.gov>
To: "Eddy, Wesley M. (GRC-MS00)[Verizon]" <wesley.m.eddy@nasa.gov>, "tcpm@ietf.org" <tcpm@ietf.org>
Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2009 23:45:59 -0500
Thread-Topic: comments on draft-ietf-tcpm-icmp-attacks-05
Thread-Index: AcnqTJ5N/OQHUFfvTA+OQMGvgkY7QgAAZwrg
Message-ID: <C304DB494AC0C04C87C6A6E2FF5603DB221796D53E@NDJSSCC01.ndc.nasa.gov>
References: <C304DB494AC0C04C87C6A6E2FF5603DB221796D53C@NDJSSCC01.ndc.nasa.gov>
In-Reply-To: <C304DB494AC0C04C87C6A6E2FF5603DB221796D53C@NDJSSCC01.ndc.nasa.gov>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=1.12.7400:2.4.4, 1.2.40, 4.0.166 definitions=2009-06-10_14:2009-06-01, 2009-06-10, 2009-06-10 signatures=0
Cc: Fernando Gont <fernando@gont.com.ar>, 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: Thu, 11 Jun 2009 04:45:48 -0000

As both a WG-participant and co-chair, I think that the
Appendix A explanations of which ICMPs need to be paid
attention to because some of them say things that I'm
not sure are totally supported by prior RFCs.  For
instance, I'm not certain that setting the DF bit is
only possible for hosts that support PMTUD ... is there
a reference for that?  Further, it discusses ambiguity
in 1122, that we should be clarifying in the main text
rather than an appendix, I think ... what does the rest
of the WG think?

---------------------------
Wes Eddy
Network & Systems Architect
Verizon FNS / NASA GRC
Office: (216) 433-6682
---------------------------

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email