IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Tsvwg] SCTP and ICMP Protocol Unreachable

"Brian F. G. Bidulock" <bidulock@openss7.org> Fri, 22 September 2006 10:13 UTC

Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GQi2J-0000Lk-LU; Fri, 22 Sep 2006 06:13:35 -0400
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GQi2I-0000Lb-Py for tsvwg@ietf.org; Fri, 22 Sep 2006 06:13:34 -0400
Received: from gw.openss7.com ([142.179.199.224]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GQi2H-0005sd-BT for tsvwg@ietf.org; Fri, 22 Sep 2006 06:13:34 -0400
Received: from ns.pigworks.openss7.net (IDENT:u7bW+EPFNHkJSegujULSjSEAHlKS5gc0@ns1.evil.openss7.net [192.168.9.1]) by gw.openss7.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id k8MADWD19063; Fri, 22 Sep 2006 04:13:32 -0600
Received: (from brian@localhost) by ns.pigworks.openss7.net (8.11.6/8.11.6) id k8MADWj14181; Fri, 22 Sep 2006 04:13:32 -0600
Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2006 04:13:32 -0600
From: "Brian F. G. Bidulock" <bidulock@openss7.org>
To: Randall Stewart <rrs@cisco.com>, sctp-impl@cisco.com, Michael Tuexen <Michael.Tuexen@micmac.franken.de>, sctp-impl@external.cisco.com, IETF Transport Area Mailing List <tsvwg@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Tsvwg] SCTP and ICMP Protocol Unreachable
Message-ID: <20060922041332.A13611@openss7.org>
Mail-Followup-To: Randall Stewart <rrs@cisco.com>, sctp-impl@cisco.com, Michael Tuexen <Michael.Tuexen@micmac.franken.de>, sctp-impl@external.cisco.com, IETF Transport Area Mailing List <tsvwg@ietf.org>
References: <20060920094032.GA28221@artesyncp.com> <20060920055135.A30614@openss7.org> <9C48BA4E-7C94-4EF6-B2FD-3AD374552CF3@micmac.franken.de> <20060920120115.A5094@openss7.org> <2FB2577B-5E0D-4565-BD75-C8CFCD924D95@micmac.franken.de> <20060920123634.A6026@openss7.org> <451266D7.9090202@lakerest.net> <20060921132657.GF28221@artesyncp.com> <4512E2ED.8010702@cisco.com> <20060922095157.GC28642@artesyncp.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5.1i
In-Reply-To: <20060922095157.GC28642@artesyncp.com>; from Stephane@artesyncp.com on Fri, Sep 22, 2006 at 10:51:57AM +0100
Organization: http://www.openss7.org/
Dsn-Notification-To: <bidulock@openss7.org>
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 798b2e660f1819ae38035ac1d8d5e3ab
Cc:
X-BeenThere: tsvwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
Reply-To: bidulock@openss7.org
List-Id: Transport Area Working Group <tsvwg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tsvwg>, <mailto:tsvwg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:tsvwg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tsvwg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tsvwg>, <mailto:tsvwg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: tsvwg-bounces@ietf.org

Stephane,

Stephane Chazelas wrote:        (Fri, 22 Sep 2006 10:51:57)
> 
> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-tsvwg-sctpthreat-01.txt
> 
> 5) is taken care of by the change to the RFC that every address
> must be confirmed first. So that only heartbeats are sent to the
> victims

Well, no.  That was Michael's point (I believe): if you only mark the
destination unusable you will be sending another nonce-HB to the next
destination soon.  If you aborted the association in response to the
ICMP, only one nonce-HB would be sent.  Thus you reintroduce the
amplification if you mark destinations or ignore ICMP.

--brian

-- 
Brian F. G. Bidulock
bidulock@openss7.org
http://www.openss7.org/

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email