Subject: GTSM-bis status and TCP RST resistance

From: Pekka Savola <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2006 15:05:24 +0200 (EET)

Hi,

It has been awfully quiet on the GTSMbis front lately 
(draft-ietf-rtgwg-rfc3682bis-05.txt).

I think this is important work and we should be pushing it for 
Standards Track on high priority.

One particular area where the doc may need more text is dealing with 
TCP RSTs.  Do we assume that GTSM-enabled peers also send TCP RST's 
(related to GTSM-enabled sessions) with TTL=255?  Note that if the 
system doesn't use TTL=255 for default (current IANA default TTL is 
64), the host kernel will need a modification.  Do we verify that on 
receipt?  If not, how do we make GTSM resistant to TCP RST attacks?

-- 
Pekka Savola                 "You each name yourselves king, yet the
Netcore Oy                    kingdom bleeds."
Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings

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