At 9:44 AM -0800 12/11/01, Christian Huitema wrote: >Now, with the compression, we would in many cases be able to "compress" >the source address, resulting in: > ><-- outer IPv6 header -> <-- inner IPv6 packet, encrypted -> >+----+--------+--------+------------+----+--------+ +------------ >| | | | | | | | >|oNAF| oSRC | oDEST | ESP header |iNAF| iDEST | | iPAYLOAD >| | | | | | | | >+----+--------+--------+------------+----+--------+ +------------ > >The big difference between the two is the iSRC is not protected by the >encryption, but recomposed after decryption by copying oSRC -- which is >not protected. This would open an attack avenue for a hacker or, heavens >forbids, a NAT...
OK, I think I get it. If you used AH in the outer header to assure the authenticity of oSRC, you could then safely put it back into the reconstructed inner header. But that would add the overhead of an AH header, which would reduce or eliminate any benefit from the compression. There may be other zero-extra-overhead solutions, but I need to think about it some more... Steve -------------------------------------------------------------------- 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] --------------------------------------------------------------------
