On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 8:35 AM, Shishio Tsuchiya <[email protected]> wrote:
> CB
> MAP validate onsistency of the source IPv6 address and source port number for 
> the packet using BMR.
> It dicribes section 8.1.
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-softwire-map-05#section-8.1
>
> I can't understand why you are saying about open DNS resolver in this 
> question.
> Basically MAP domain includes CE are managed by service provider.
> MAP-CE should configure as it does not response for query from WAN.
>

 i am mostly thinking of a rogue MAP-CE spoofing may cause lots of
problems on the BR (port dos, already noted in the draft) and
undermining the attribution features of MAP.  If a criminal in a court
can say spoofing is possible and anyone could have sent those illegal
packets, then they can deny the attribution features of MAP.  It seems
like if rogue MAP-CE spoofing is not explicitly denied at the
attachment PE router with a "MUST use RFC 2827" in the
draft-ietf-softwire-map, then there is a problem with the spec that
should be resolved.  So, the MAP team may want to add that.



> Regards,
> -Shishio
>
>
> (2013/04/26 0:07), cb.list6 wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Tom Taylor just sent a mail to behave on logging that piqued my interest.
>>
>> The MAP based solutions set is stateless.
>>
>> And therefore it has an elegant solution for those interested in 
>> attribution, specifically in the context of law enforcement.
>>
>> Can someone explain where I can find a pointer on how the stateless mapping 
>> holds up to spoofing from the MAP domain? Could a malicious user send bad 
>> packets where this attribution model attributes the bad packets to a 3rd 
>> party.
>>
>> If Alice and Bob are communicating, could Dec send a packets through the BR 
>> appearing to be from Alice where destination is Bob.
>>
>> Stateless is great. But there is no chance that the MAP BR is not the new 
>> open DNS resolver, right ?
>>
>> If this is already covered, a simple pointer is all I need.
>>
>> Will this type of attribution be sufficient for courts ? Or is it 
>> circumstantial ?
>>
>> CB.
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Softwires mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Softwires mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires
_______________________________________________
Softwires mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires

Reply via email to