Hi,

In TCPM WG, while discussing draft-ietf-tcpm-tcp-antispoof section 3.2.1, we came across something that may or may not be an issue in IP-in-IP tunneling spec (RFC 2003). The spec says (see below) "[inner header TTL is decremented], if the tunneling is being done as part of forwarding the datagram, ..."

Joe's interpretation is that BITW implementations of IP-in-IP need not decrement inner header TTL. Personally, I don't think RFC 2003 was even intended to cover BITW implementations.

This may become important if you want to apply GTSM (i.e. TTL=255 checking) to encapsulated packets between the two endpoints of the tunnel. If BITW implementation is acceptable, the topological area where TTL=255 applies expands slightly.

Does anyone recall the intent of the RFC?
Is anyone aware of BITW implementations of RFC 2003?
Or do folks have strong feelings what the intent should be?

Joe Touch said:
RFC2003, sec 3.1, third-to-last (emphasis mine):

  When encapsulating a datagram, the TTL in the inner IP header is
  decremented by one **if the tunneling is being done as part of
  forwarding the datagram**; **otherwise, the inner header TTL is not
  changed during encapsulation**.  If the resulting TTL in the inner IP
  header is 0, the datagram is discarded and an ICMP Time Exceeded
  message SHOULD be returned to the sender.  An encapsulator MUST NOT
  encapsulate a datagram with TTL = 0.

If that packet is generated at that node, or if the packet is sent to
the tunnel in a non-forwarding (BITW) step, that decrement would not happen.

  The TTL in the inner IP header is **not changed when decapsulating**.
  If, after decapsulation, the inner datagram has TTL = 0, the
  decapsulator MUST discard the datagram. If, after decapsulation, the
  decapsulator forwards the datagram to one of its network interfaces,
  **it will decrement the TTL as a result of doing normal IP forwarding**.
  See also Section 4.4.

The decapsulator decrements only if forwarding - again, if the packet
stops at the destination or if the device isn't a forwarder (BITW), that
wouldn't happen.

--
Pekka Savola                 "You each name yourselves king, yet the
Netcore Oy                    kingdom bleeds."
Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings

_______________________________________________
Int-area mailing list
[email protected]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area

Reply via email to