Re: [v6ops] Mitigation against IPv6 Router Advertisements flooding - draft-moonesamy-ra-flood-limit-00

[Arturo Servin <[e-mail]>]

SM,

    Sorry, I should have said "Or are these recommendations orthogonal
to a network applying RA Guard?"

    I think the ansewer is still yes. But for that reason I think that
you should mention that this is an add-on to RA Guard (not instead of,
not criticizing it) and it is intended to provide some security
mechanisms to the host when the network administrator do not have this
capability (RA-Guard) in its network.

    In the end, having RA-Guard could solve enteraly this problem, but
when it is not provided by the network the host should have mechanisms
to defend itself. Then is when your draft applies. Does it make sense my
comment?
   
Regards,
as

On 7/4/13 3:02 AM, S Moonesamy wrote:
> Hi Arturo,
> At 18:19 03-07-2013, Arturo Servin wrote:
>>     Why IPv6 Router Advertisement Guard would be not enough?
>
> The draft does not seek to criticize Router Advertisement Guard in any
> way.  The draft looks at what can occur on the host and what has been
> done to ensure that there isn't a crash.
>
>>     Or are these recommendations orthogonal to a network applying RA?
>
> Yes.
>
>>     I think that it would be important to address those questions in
>> the draft.
>
> That would be an operational issue.
>
>>     Also, related. Is it possible for a host to perform a RS attack?
>
> I don't have sufficient information to provide a good answer.  I
> prefer not to give you a misleading answer.
>
> Regards,
> S. Moonesamy