Re: [tcpm] ICMP attacks draft (issue 1): hard errors -> soft errors (in synchronized states)

Fernando Gont wrote:
> Folks
> 
> I will separate the discussion into different issues, so that it is
> easier to get consensus on the different parts of the draft.
> 
> Issue 1 is: When a so-called ICMP "hard error" is received for a
> connection in any of the synchronized states (ESTABLISHED and so on),
> treat the error message as a soft error (i.e., do NOT abort the
> corresponding connection).

WHY? Such an error could occur due to a reboot. It is legitimate operation.

> This improves TCP's robustness. In the event the error condition does
> not disappear in the near term, the connection will time out, anyway.

Now I'm confused. If a node were to have IPv4 and reboot with IPv6, you
want it to timeout. But your other draft wants to kill the TCP attempt
to connect *immediately* so you can retry.

So which is it? is restarting TCP connections important or not?

IMO, there is no reason to change TCP's behavior here, and it's
sufficient to leave it alone.

---

The whole tone of this doc is that there are attacks that need to be
dealt with; it ignores cases where such messages are sent legitimately.

Joe

Re: [tcpm] ICMP attacks draft (issue 1): hard errors -> soft errors (in synchronized states)

Attachment: signature.asc