Subject: [rddp] issue (5) - Protection for shared RQ, closure

From: [email-masked]
Date: Sat, 1 May 2004 14:10:28 -0400

One more attempt at restating the requirement:

  The proposed requirement is that the Privileged Resource Manager
  contain code sufficient so that a non-RDDP application can be
  converted to an RDDP application without enabling a denial of
  service attack that disconnects innocent clients or having to
  write inter-client receive resource protection code.  This is
  a "MUST implement" requirement, so that the functionality is
  available to any RDDP application; applications MAY use this
  protection, but are not required to do so.

As noted previously:
  a) With my WG chair hat on, I'm going to say that solving
	this shared RQ resource protection problem is a
	requirement on the rddp WG's output.  This is a fairly
	fundamental system robustness issue, even within
	a single application.
And on this basis, I believe the above restatement of the
requirement represents rough consensus of the rddp WG.  This
requirement will also apply to shared completion queue protection.

Any further objections to this should be posted to the list,
but please be clear about whether the objection is to the obligation
to solve this problem (a), or to the solution (Privileged Resource
Manager MUST implement Shared RQ protection).

Thanks,
--David

----------------------------------------------------
David L. Black, Senior Technologist
EMC Corporation, 176 South St., Hopkinton, MA  01748
+1 (508) 293-7953             FAX: +1 (508) 293-7786
[email-masked]        Mobile: +1 (978) 394-7754
----------------------------------------------------

_______________________________________________
rddp mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rddp