Re: [tcpm] tcp-auth-opt issue: replay protection

"Anantha Ramaiah (ananth)" <ananth@cisco.com> Wed, 06 August 2008 14:57 UTC

Return-Path: <tcpm-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: tcpm-archive@megatron.ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-tcpm-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C65B228C367; Wed, 6 Aug 2008 07:57:43 -0700 (PDT)
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 4A81128C367 for <tcpm@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 6 Aug 2008 07:57:43 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.228
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.228 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.371, 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 2X0PSOxCW74X for <tcpm@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 6 Aug 2008 07:57:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sj-iport-1.cisco.com (sj-iport-1.cisco.com [171.71.176.70]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 396BF28C356 for <tcpm@ietf.org>; Wed, 6 Aug 2008 07:57:42 -0700 (PDT)
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.31,315,1215388800"; d="scan'208";a="62232394"
Received: from sj-dkim-1.cisco.com ([171.71.179.21]) by sj-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 06 Aug 2008 14:58:16 +0000
Received: from sj-core-5.cisco.com (sj-core-5.cisco.com [171.71.177.238]) by sj-dkim-1.cisco.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m76EwGN9023702; Wed, 6 Aug 2008 07:58:16 -0700
Received: from xbh-sjc-211.amer.cisco.com (xbh-sjc-211.cisco.com [171.70.151.144]) by sj-core-5.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m76EwGJE021526; Wed, 6 Aug 2008 14:58:16 GMT
Received: from xmb-sjc-21c.amer.cisco.com ([171.70.151.176]) by xbh-sjc-211.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Wed, 6 Aug 2008 07:58:15 -0700
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Wed, 06 Aug 2008 07:57:05 -0700
Message-ID: <0C53DCFB700D144284A584F54711EC58059847E3@xmb-sjc-21c.amer.cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <045CB0E7-78B2-49B8-91C9-B2AB19C47A05@nokia.com>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: [tcpm] tcp-auth-opt issue: replay protection
Thread-Index: Acj3zbA4PpIJO84dQT2cwVyRc68IkQABLCYg
References: <20080728042451.C7A174B7AD3@kilo.rtfm.com><488DD77D.9070608@isi.edu><20080728144721.AC9184B905A@kilo.rtfm.com><488DE021.7070307@isi.edu><20080728164013.422D14B9600@kilo.rtfm.com><F32F8EC5-70C9-4A7B-A2D2-B00CA43AECFA@nokia.com><20080730213253.B347F4D52E1@kilo.rtfm.com><4890E9AE.3000607@isi.edu><20080731001609.6511C4D5E34@kilo.rtfm.com><489175BD.6040201@isi.edu><396556a20807311010k78c22981xa0eebd1b46e9f619@mail.gmail.com><48935983.80701@isi.edu><3FBA635A-0473-4B58-86E2-C7523A35CE24@nokia.com><20080806133734.7721D527252@kilo.rtfm.com> <045CB0E7-78B2-49B8-91C9-B2AB19C47A05@nokia.com>
From: "Anantha Ramaiah (ananth)" <ananth@cisco.com>
To: Lars Eggert <lars.eggert@nokia.com>, ext Eric Rescorla <ekr@networkresonance.com>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 06 Aug 2008 14:58:15.0929 (UTC) FILETIME=[DAFE5E90:01C8F7D4]
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; l=1164; t=1218034696; x=1218898696; c=relaxed/simple; s=sjdkim1004; h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version; d=cisco.com; i=ananth@cisco.com; z=From:=20=22Anantha=20Ramaiah=20(ananth)=22=20<ananth@cisco .com> |Subject:=20RE=3A=20[tcpm]=20tcp-auth-opt=20issue=3A=20repl ay=20protection |Sender:=20; bh=+UVV0KI9AidKf1Ner7XHxtQtTPqJatmrGB69Rx+s0T4=; b=m9CkvwW61g3YAVvflC9ym1MhtMG08CgZkEi2lT3EfFA7po33OJw4mAMjGx 3sHxd3QG5ruuuqKnAEIx4GmK0a6HmnXHaWygUaAEgLP1Gad/e4Spy9MeAH3V czj893mKehdlV2jMsVxwErFbzrZs6v0UZfvHiHyBO/+LPgKKKHMYY=;
Authentication-Results: sj-dkim-1; header.From=ananth@cisco.com; dkim=pass ( sig from cisco.com/sjdkim1004 verified; );
Cc: Adam Langley <agl@imperialviolet.org>, tcpm@ietf.org, ext Joe Touch <touch@isi.edu>
Subject: Re: [tcpm] tcp-auth-opt issue: replay protection
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: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/private/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>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: tcpm-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: tcpm-bounces@ietf.org

> I don't think saving sent segments makes a lot of sense. It 
> may work, but ACK/SACK and timestamp information of the old 
> packets would be out of sync relative to the current 
> connection state, so I'd expect there could at the very least 
> be inefficiencies. Unless I'm misremembering, all the stacks 
> that I'm familiar with create a new segment for 
> retransmitting lost data with TCP control information that 
> accurately reflects the current connection state.

FWIW :
Since you are talking about implementations, stacks which care about
efficiency would still use the same old packet (assuming no
re-packetization needs to be done) and will simply re-do the necessary
fields (timestamps, ACK/SACK, MD5 etc.,) and transmit the packet.
Clearly, the ammount of work you need to do to fix-up the packet for
retransmission depends on how many options are there and how much
information has changed. [Again you don't expect the IP options to be
changed in between retransmissions]. This is different from fetching a
new packet and copying the data and fixing up all the information, which
is less efficient.

-Anantha

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