Subject: Re: draft-ietf-ipv6-deprecate-rh0-01-candidate-00

From: "Ebalard, Arnaud" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2007 08:41:22 +0200

Hello,

Le 8 juin 07 à 04:40, Joe Abley a écrit :

> My understanding of the CanSecWest authors' thinking with respect to
> this particular technique is that the number of (A, B) waypoints in
> the RH0 header would be varied such that for every one packet that
> entered the A-B cyclotron, you could achieve N packets leaving
> simultaneously, each having been round the A-B loop a different
> number of times.

That's a good summary.

The values given in the slide are based on the simple computation of  
the number of packet you can inject per second : this depends on your  
upload bandwidth, the PMTU and the number of addresses in the RH0  
(less addresses, more packets, as they are shorter).

> Maximising the output of such a capacitor would require tuning the
> RH0 extension header construction according to the observed round-
> trip latency between A and B which seems non-trivial, but at the same
> time not impossible.

True, it is non-trivial.

> Note that I have not explored the details of this with the CanSecWest
> presenters, however; it's possible that they were thinking of
> something different (and equally plausible that there's a fault with
> my logic, above).

nope, not AFAIK.

a+

-- Arnaud Ebalard
EADS Innovation Works - IT Sec Research Engineer
PGP KeyID:047A5026 FingerPrint:47EB85FEB99AAB85FD0946F30255957C047A5026

--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
[email-masked]
Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------