Mohan Parthasarathy wrote:

> t very clear as to why you have to reserve a bit in the
> address to express different security mechanisms being used. Why can't
> this be built into the protocol itself ? Is it because that the future
> security mechanisms will not use the same set of message exchanges as
> RR and hence you want a protocol independent way of indicating the method ?
> I would assume that any mechanism to establish the binding between home
> address and care of address  would have a few message exchanges. Can you 

Because the MitM attacker can change everything related to these
messages, it doesn't help to put anything to the messages for the
bidding down protection.

Note that the MitM can also change the IP address, but if he does
so, he is *not* attacking the original host, as the address is
changed.

Jari

--------------------------------------------------------------------
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]
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply via email to