Subject: Re: GTSM-bis status and TCP RST resistance

From: Alex Zinin <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 5 Mar 2006 05:00:42 -0800

I pinged Dave on this, and he would be happy to work on this if there's
interest in the WG.

-- 
Alex
http://www.psg.com/~zinin

Saturday, January 21, 2006, 5:05:24 AM, Pekka Savola wrote:
> 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?

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