Subject: [manet] #18: NHDP Sequence Number Threat

From: "manet issue tracker" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2013 07:40:21 -0000

#18: NHDP Sequence Number Threat

 I don't know how the sequence number section was ignored/deleted in the
 updated draft but would like to advise to include as per the below input
 discussions.

 http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/manet/current/msg13286.html

 http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/manet/current/msg15004.html

 http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/manet/current/msg15006.html

 The attack to sequence number of packets/messages may make changes into
 NHDP and routing. If you disagree please discuss,

 Regards
 AB

-- 
----------------------------------------+-------------------------------
 Reporter:  [email-masked]  |      Owner:  Abdussalam Baryun
     Type:  enhancement                 |     Status:  new
 Priority:  major                       |  Milestone:  milestone1
Component:  nhdp-sec-threats            |    Version:  1.0
 Severity:  In WG Last Call             |   Keywords:  NHDP
----------------------------------------+-------------------------------

Ticket URL: <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/manet/trac/ticket/18>
manet <http://tools.ietf.org/manet/>

---

From: Abdussalam Baryun <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2013 07:51:31 +0100

I think as related to this ticket about NHDP-interface sequence
number, three errata (two technical and one editorials) were posted
later [1] [2] [3]. If we change RFC5444 related to interfaces info,
then we will need to change RFC6130. Why it was it not mentioned the
packet sequence number maintained in RFC6130-NHDP and how, or why not
as NHDP sequence number? I may need to prapare an update about NHDP
information which is different from threats of NHDP.

[1] http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/manet/current/msg15025.html
[2] http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/manet/current/msg15026.html
[3] http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/manet/current/msg15058.html

AB