Steve,
"Steven M. Bellovin" wrote:
>
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Christian
> Huitema" writes:
>
> >
> >I would think that a study of mechanisms to trace the actual source of
> >Internet packets would pass the charter test. After all, there have been
> >several proposals to do this by letting the routers mark bits in
> >packets, using a probabilistic algorithm. This seem to fall in the
> >single problem / existing proposed solution / concrete deliverable
> >category.
>
> Yup. But since I'm far from convinced of the feasibility of those
> solutions, I chose to propose ICMP Traceback as the preferred
> mechanism. The first such scheme, by Savage et al., seems to have too
> high a computational complexity, as shown by Song and Perrig. Song and
> Perrig have their own, much more efficient scheme, but it requires good
> knowledge of Internet topology, and I'm not convinced that that would
> be forthcoming. All such schemes suffer from a lack of a place to do
> the marking -- using the ID field breaks fragmentation and AH, there's
> no place in the v6 header except maybe the flow label, etc.
For IPv6, you could define a new extension header (hop-by-hop option).
Brian
> >
> >Indeed, we can also debate whether source tracing is useful...
> >
> Indeed.
>
> --Steve Bellovin, http://www.research.att.com/~smb
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List
> IPng Home Page: http://playground.sun.com/ipng
> FTP archive: ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng
> Direct all administrative requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List
IPng Home Page: http://playground.sun.com/ipng
FTP archive: ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng
Direct all administrative requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------
