Re: [v6ops] Revised I-D: Advice on RA-Guard Implementation

Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com> Thu, 12 January 2012 15:56 UTC

Return-Path: <fgont@si6networks.com>
X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3BDAB21F85E6 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 12 Jan 2012 07:56:50 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.52
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.52 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.079, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id akXtu5B76Luj for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 12 Jan 2012 07:56:49 -0800 (PST)
Received: from srv01.bbserve.nl (unknown [IPv6:2a02:27f8:1025:18::232]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B6BD321F85E9 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Thu, 12 Jan 2012 07:56:49 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [190.48.225.51] (helo=[192.168.123.102]) by srv01.bbserve.nl with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.77) (envelope-from <fgont@si6networks.com>) id 1RlN10-0001Ui-NU; Thu, 12 Jan 2012 16:56:38 +0100
Message-ID: <4F0EF14E.7080305@si6networks.com>
Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2012 11:42:22 -0300
From: Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com>
Organization: SI6 Networks
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.2.24) Gecko/20111108 Thunderbird/3.1.16
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Simon Perreault <simon.perreault@viagenie.ca>
References: <4F04F5CA.6010802@si6networks.com> <4F05AA98.4090400@viagenie.ca> <4F0A4D7F.6000101@si6networks.com> <4F0D8B0F.2030400@viagenie.ca>
In-Reply-To: <4F0D8B0F.2030400@viagenie.ca>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.1.2
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: v6ops@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [v6ops] Revised I-D: Advice on RA-Guard Implementation
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: v6ops discussion list <v6ops.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/v6ops>
List-Post: <mailto:v6ops@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2012 15:56:50 -0000

Hi, Simon,

On 01/11/2012 10:13 AM, Simon Perreault wrote:
>> The idea is that if that non-first fragments are always forwarded,
>> whereas first-fragments are blocked if:
>>
>> a) We've found that what follows the fragment header is an RA packet, or,
>>
>> b) this is a first-fragment, and it is missing upper-layer protocol
>> information.
> 
> Ok, I understand now. Thanks.
> 
> I still don't see where in the text it is said that non-first fragments
> are always forwarded. It looks like it makes no difference between first
> and non-first.

You're right. I will improve the corresponding section and send you a
heads up so that you can take a look and comment before I rev the document.

Thanks!

Best regards,
-- 
Fernando Gont
SI6 Networks
e-mail: fgont@si6networks.com
PGP Fingerprint: 6666 31C6 D484 63B2 8FB1 E3C4 AE25 0D55 1D4E 7492