On Feb 20, 2009, at 9:53 AM, Michael Procter wrote:
Henry Sinnreich wrote:
it's trying to stop SIP servers being used as DOS amplifiers.
If you take this viewpoint, then the fewer servers, the less
vulnerability?
Henry
In this context, "SIP server" means both proxies and UAs (at least,
their UAS component). Eliminating B2BUAs (which I think is what you
were getting at) sadly won't eliminate this attack.
I believe Henry would also like to reduce proxies. I'm becoming more
and more fond of this as a general design principle. Quite possibly,
the only proxies we should have are ones that provide the outbound/
registrar/rendezvous function set. And that's just because we don't
have those functions at a lower transport level. Other proxy functions
(like application dispatch and delivery) may be pointless exercises
in futility. A working HIP-like transport layer could eliminate the
outbound/registrar/rendezvous functions.
Most of the other "proxy" functions we've discussed are probably
better as UA functions.
Of course, that doesn't help with an attack mode that turns UAs into
amplifiers . . .
--
Dean
_______________________________________________
Sip mailing list https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip
This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol
Use [email protected] for questions on current sip
Use [email protected] for new developments on the application of sip
