Hi Xiaohu,
> Are the above two arguments in accordance with each other?
Ah, I finally see what you're getting at. In particular, this comment
>> You're correct. I should have said that the packet does NOT match any
>> current connection and thus appears to be an independent entity.
... Conflicts with
> The following text is quoted from the Section 12.2:
> "If
> a received packet contains valid Identifier values and a valid
> Destination Locator, but contains a Source Locator value that is
> not present in the session cache, the packet is dropped without
> further processing as an invalid packet, unless the packet also
> contains a Nonce Destination Option with the correct value used
> for packets from the node with that Source Identifier to this
> node."
In particular, simply discarding it may be incorrect, as there may be an
Identifier collision from another, unrelated source domain. This can be
entirely legitimate. For example, it could be a SYN for a new connection.
Let's propose alternate replacement text:
If a packet is received, its Source Locator, Source Identifier,
Destination Locator, Destination Identifier and Nonce Destination Option
value are compared to the values found in the cache. If these values do
not match a correspondent found in the cache, then the packet is deemed
to have come from a new correspondent.
Does that clarify the issue? Ran, does this work?
Regards,
Tony
_______________________________________________
rrg mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg
