Re: [TERNLI] Forwarding corrupt packets

Gorry Fairhurst <gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk> Mon, 04 September 2006 13:05 UTC

Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GKE8c-0005QJ-Ic; Mon, 04 Sep 2006 09:05:18 -0400
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GKE8b-0005PG-Mo for ternli@ietf.org; Mon, 04 Sep 2006 09:05:17 -0400
Received: from [2001:630:241:204:203:baff:fe9a:8c9b] (helo=erg.abdn.ac.uk) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GKE8a-00065W-8n for ternli@ietf.org; Mon, 04 Sep 2006 09:05:17 -0400
Received: from [139.133.207.155] (dhcp-207-155.erg.abdn.ac.uk [139.133.207.155]) by erg.abdn.ac.uk (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k84D570S018983; Mon, 4 Sep 2006 14:05:07 +0100 (BST)
Message-ID: <44FC2484.50201@erg.abdn.ac.uk>
Date: Mon, 04 Sep 2006 14:05:08 +0100
From: Gorry Fairhurst <gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk>
Organization: University of Aberdeen, UK
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X Mach-O; en-US; rv:1.7.2) Gecko/20040804 Netscape/7.2
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Michael Tuexen <Michael.Tuexen@lurchi.franken.de>
Subject: Re: [TERNLI] Forwarding corrupt packets
References: <1157097623.3192.34.camel@lap10-c703.uibk.ac.at> <44F83E74.1080603@isi.edu> <1157121036.3192.148.camel@lap10-c703.uibk.ac.at> <44F84AD5.7070307@isi.edu> <1157131227.3192.220.camel@lap10-c703.uibk.ac.at> <44F8780D.9060503@isi.edu> <1157356740.3197.57.camel@lap10-c703.uibk.ac.at> <85C961BE-2B32-4A31-8235-49CCDCF1332D@lurchi.franken.de>
In-Reply-To: <85C961BE-2B32-4A31-8235-49CCDCF1332D@lurchi.franken.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-ERG-MailScanner: Found to be clean
X-ERG-MailScanner-From: gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk
X-Spam-Status: No
X-Spam-Score: -2.8 (--)
X-Scan-Signature: 0ddefe323dd869ab027dbfff7eff0465
Cc: ternli@ietf.org, Joe Touch <touch@ISI.EDU>
X-BeenThere: ternli@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
Reply-To: gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk
List-Id: Transport-Enhancing Refinements to the Network Layer Interface <ternli.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ternli>, <mailto:ternli-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/ternli>
List-Post: <mailto:ternli@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ternli-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ternli>, <mailto:ternli-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: ternli-bounces@ietf.org

So, I had missed this being discussed (sorry).

I'm quite confused about several things:

* In Section 3 it says:
    The SCTP endpoint can inform its peer that it has received an SCTP
    packet, but the CRC-32 was wrong.

I presume though that the receiver can somehow verfy that the original 
packet has been sent with a particular IP source, and protocol. How?

I'm curious also here how you know some details

* How do you find the process to respond to (since ports are not 
protected by an IP checksum)?

* How do you verify this isn't a third-party DoS attack, because 
presumably you can't rely on sequence numbers, ports, etc to help you?

* I think I could have missed it, but what is the mechanism by which an 
IP packet passes through the node and receives a treatment that leaves 
it with a corrupted CRC-32 at the transport layer, but some (reliable) 
understanding of the content (IP addresses, length, protocol, etc).

* If you return a message from a mid-box, how do you know that routers 
down-stream of the mid-box would have forwared this packet?

Gorry


Michael Tuexen wrote:
> Dear all,
> for SCTP there is an ID
> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-stewart-sctp-pktdrprep-05.txt
> which sends back a packet to the sender if the receiver detects a  
> transport
> layer checksum failure...
> 
> Best regards
> Michael
> 
> On Sep 4, 2006, at 9:59 AM, Michael Welzl wrote:
> 
>>> The question is the impact of the bad packet.
>
<Snip>

> 
>