On 03/11/2016 03:37, Michael Richardson wrote:
> 
> Brian E Carpenter <[email protected]> wrote:
>     > Currently the GRASP code finds out how many physical interfaces it has
>     > and for each one creates a multicast sending socket. It also has a
>     > socket that listens for incoming link-local multicasts on all physical
>     > interfaces.  I don't see how to do that using the ACP interfaces that
>     > you describe.
> 
> if (if_name ~= /^acp.*/):
>    secure = true

Strangely enough my Python code currently says

 _tls_required = not(acp.status())

(That would lead to a dead end in the code, since I haven't actually
implemented TLS wrapping, but we seem to be thinking the same way.)

> 
>     >> All packets, unicast or multicast that are sent into or received from
>     >> those interfaces are protected/encrypted by the fact that they are
>     >> transmitted encrypted by the seleted ACP channel encryption protocol.
> 
>     > Yes, and I'd like the LL multicast traffic to be protected too.  But as
>     > far as I can see that needs explicit support in the ACP to emulate LL
>     > multicast sockets. The ideal would be that the ACP simply emulates LL
>     > interfaces, so that GRASP could treat them exactly like physical
>     > interfaces.
> 
> This is a nil operation.

I don't understand that statement. I do understand that the adjacency table
contains enough information to make it possible for the ACP to do the right
thing, but I don't see anywhere in the ACP spec that says that it will do
the right thing.

> I think the problem is that you don't have any ACP code at this point.

True, and I don't have a clear definition of what that code will do.
If it will actually support LL multicast send and receive sockets exactly
like physical LL interfaces do, I will be happy. But there's no indication
of that in the ACP spec.

   Brian

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

Reply via email to