Re: [tcpm] DoS attack from misbehaving receivers

Caitlin Bestler wrote:
> Rob Sherwood wrote:
>> I guess I should probably jump in here somewhere :-)
>>
>> On Thu, Jan 11, 2007 at 12:00:59PM -0800, Caitlin Bestler wrote:
>>> The proposed test for a non-compliant receiver would seem to require
>>> that the sender be non-compliant itself.
>> I'm not sure I understand this comment.  Part of the utility
>> of the solution is that unmodified receivers can communicate
>> with senders that randomly skip segments, because segment
>> reordering and dropping is already handled by TCP.
> 
> Having the sender skip segments will indeed detect a non-compliant
> receiver that acks segments that were never sent. But sending
> non-contiguous TCP segments is itself not compliant.

Technically, that's equivalent to losing or reordering segments. As long
as you can't tell the difference from the receiver's point of view, why
is this not compliant?

Joe
-- 
----------------------------------------
Joe Touch
Sr. Network Engineer, USAF TSAT Space Segment

Re: [tcpm] DoS attack from misbehaving receivers

Attachment: signature.asc