Mališa Vučinić <[email protected]> wrote:
    > At the interim today, we discussed the need of tagging join traffic at
    > the Join Proxy (JP). The problem is that JP forwards into the network
    > traffic that originates from untrusted pledges, which can cause the
    > exchange of 6P commands at intermediate nodes on the path from JP to
    > 6LBR.

    > A malicious pledge is therefore able to affect scheduling of
    > intermediate nodes in the network which could potentially result in
    > resource exhaustion. A bandwidth cap at JP, that is currently
    > recommended in minimal-security draft, limits but doesn’t completely
    > solve the problem. An attacker with access to multiple JPs could inject
    > enough traffic to disturb the network.

    > Pascal proposed using ToS bits in the IPv6 header to tag join
    > traffic. As part of the JP behavior in minimal-security draft, we would
    > specify that each forwarded packet must be tagged. Then, it would be up
    > to individual SFs to determine what to do with this traffic.

To be specific, I think that the JP should set the DSCP bits in the packet
as per rfc2597 section 6, we want AF43 (0b100110).


-- 
Michael Richardson <[email protected]>, Sandelman Software Works
 -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-



Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

_______________________________________________
6tisch mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6tisch

Reply via email to