diff options
| -rw-r--r-- | internet-draft-satp.html | 102 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | internet-draft-satp.txt | 130 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | internet-draft-satp.xml | 4 |
3 files changed, 196 insertions, 40 deletions
diff --git a/internet-draft-satp.html b/internet-draft-satp.html index f0b1b8a..2c49a5e 100644 --- a/internet-draft-satp.html +++ b/internet-draft-satp.html @@ -140,6 +140,7 @@ --></style> </head> <body> +<table summary="layout" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="2" class="TOCbug" align="right"><tr><td class="TOCbug"><a href="#toc"> TOC </a></td></tr></table> <table summary="layout" width="66%" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td><table summary="layout" width="100%" border="0" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="1"> <tr><td class="header">Network Working Group</td><td class="header">O. Gsenger</td></tr> <tr><td class="header">Internet-Draft</td><td class="header">March 2007</td></tr> @@ -181,30 +182,96 @@ Copyright © The IETF Trust (2007).</p> <p>The secure anycast tunneling protocol (satp) defines a protocol used for communication between any combination of unicast and anycast tunnel endpoints. It allows tunneling of every ETHER TYPE protocol (e.g. ethernet, ip, arp ...). SATP directly includes cryptography and message authentication based on the methodes used by SRTP. It is intended to deliver a generic, scaleable and secure solution for tunneling and relaying of packets of any protocol. +</p><a name="toc"></a><br /><hr /> +<h3>Table of Contents</h3> +<p class="toc"> +<a href="#anchor1">1.</a> +Introduction<br /> + <a href="#anchor2">1.1.</a> +Notational Conventions<br /> +<a href="#anchor3">2.</a> +Motivation and usage scenarios<br /> + <a href="#anchor4">2.1.</a> +Usage scenarions<br /> + <a href="#anchor5">2.1.1.</a> +tunneling from unicast hosts over anycast routers to other unicast hosts<br /> + <a href="#anchor6">2.1.2.</a> +tunneling from unicast hosts to anycast networks<br /> + <a href="#anchor7">2.1.3.</a> +redundant tunnel connection of 2 networks<br /> + <a href="#anchor8">2.2.</a> +Encapsulation<br /> +<a href="#anchor9">3.</a> +Using SATP on top of IP<br /> + <a href="#anchor10">3.1.</a> +Fragmentation<br /> + <a href="#anchor11">3.2.</a> +ICMP messages<br /> +<a href="#anchor12">4.</a> +Protocol specification<br /> + <a href="#anchor13">4.1.</a> +Header format<br /> + <a href="#anchor14">4.2.</a> +sender ID<br /> + <a href="#anchor15">4.3.</a> +sequence number<br /> + <a href="#anchor16">4.4.</a> +payload<br /> + <a href="#anchor17">4.5.</a> +padding (OPTIONAL)<br /> + <a href="#anchor18">4.6.</a> +padding count<br /> + <a href="#anchor19">4.7.</a> +payload type field<br /> + <a href="#anchor20">4.8.</a> +Encryption<br /> +<a href="#anchor21">5.</a> +Security Considerations<br /> + <a href="#anchor22">5.1.</a> +Replay protection<br /> +<a href="#anchor23">6.</a> +IANA Considerations<br /> +<a href="#rfc.references1">7.</a> +References<br /> + <a href="#rfc.references1">7.1.</a> +Normative References<br /> + <a href="#rfc.references2">7.2.</a> +Informational References<br /> +<a href="#rfc.authors">§</a> +Author's Address<br /> +<a href="#rfc.copyright">§</a> +Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements<br /> </p> +<br clear="all" /> + <a name="anchor1"></a><br /><hr /> +<table summary="layout" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="2" class="TOCbug" align="right"><tr><td class="TOCbug"><a href="#toc"> TOC </a></td></tr></table> <a name="rfc.section.1"></a><h3>1. Introduction</h3> <p>SATP is somehow a mixture of a generic encapsulation protocol like <a class='info' href='#RFC2784'>GRE<span> (</span><span class='info'>Farinacci, D., Li, T., Hanks, S., Meyer, D., and P. Traina, “Generic Routing Encapsulation (GRE),” March 2000.</span><span>)</span></a> [4] and a secure tunneling protocol as <a class='info' href='#RFC2401'>IPsec<span> (</span><span class='info'>Kent, S. and R. Atkinson, “Security Architecture for the Internet Protocol,” November 1998.</span><span>)</span></a> [5] in tunnel mode. To save some header overhead it uses the encryption technices of <a class='info' href='#RFC3711'>SRTP<span> (</span><span class='info'>Baugher, M., McGrew, D., Naslund, M., Carrara, E., and K. Norrman, “The Secure Real-time Transport Protocol (SRTP),” March 2004.</span><span>)</span></a> [1]. It supports peer to peer tunnels, where tunnel endpoints can be any combination of unicast, multicast or anycast hosts, so it defines a <a class='info' href='#RFC1546'>Host Anycast Service<span> (</span><span class='info'>Partridge, C., Mendez, T., and W. Milliken, “Host Anycasting Service,” November 1993.</span><span>)</span></a> [6] </p> <a name="anchor2"></a><br /><hr /> +<table summary="layout" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="2" class="TOCbug" align="right"><tr><td class="TOCbug"><a href="#toc"> TOC </a></td></tr></table> <a name="rfc.section.1.1"></a><h3>1.1. Notational Conventions</h3> <p>The keywords "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in <a class='info' href='#RFC2119'>RFC2119<span> (</span><span class='info'>Bradner, S., “Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels,” March 1997.</span><span>)</span></a> [2]. </p> <a name="anchor3"></a><br /><hr /> +<table summary="layout" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="2" class="TOCbug" align="right"><tr><td class="TOCbug"><a href="#toc"> TOC </a></td></tr></table> <a name="rfc.section.2"></a><h3>2. Motivation and usage scenarios</h3> <p>This section gives an overview of possible usage scenarios. Please note, that the protocols used in the figures are only examples and that SATP itself does not care about either transport protocols or encapsulated protocols. Routing is not done by SATP and each implemetation MAY choose it's own way of doing this task (e.g. using functions provided by the operating system). SATP is used only to encapsulate and encrypt data. </p> <a name="anchor4"></a><br /><hr /> +<table summary="layout" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="2" class="TOCbug" align="right"><tr><td class="TOCbug"><a href="#toc"> TOC </a></td></tr></table> <a name="rfc.section.2.1"></a><h3>2.1. Usage scenarions</h3> <a name="anchor5"></a><br /><hr /> +<table summary="layout" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="2" class="TOCbug" align="right"><tr><td class="TOCbug"><a href="#toc"> TOC </a></td></tr></table> <a name="rfc.section.2.1.1"></a><h3>2.1.1. tunneling from unicast hosts over anycast routers to other unicast hosts</h3> <br /><hr class="insert" /> @@ -226,6 +293,7 @@ tunneling from unicast hosts over anycast routers to other unicast hosts</h3> <p>In this scenario the payload gets encapsuleted into a SATP packet by a unicast host and gets transmitted to one of the anycast routers. It than gets decapsulated by the router. This router makes a routing descision based on the underlying protocol and transmits a new SATP package to one or more unicast hosts depending on the routing descition. </p> <a name="anchor6"></a><br /><hr /> +<table summary="layout" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="2" class="TOCbug" align="right"><tr><td class="TOCbug"><a href="#toc"> TOC </a></td></tr></table> <a name="rfc.section.2.1.2"></a><h3>2.1.2. tunneling from unicast hosts to anycast networks</h3> <br /><hr class="insert" /> @@ -254,6 +322,7 @@ tunneling from unicast hosts to anycast networks</h3> <p>When the unicast hosts wants to transmit data to one of the anycast DNS servers, it encapsulates the data and sends a SATP packet to the anycast address of the routers. The packet arrives at one of the routers, gets decapsulated and routed to the DNS server. This method can be used to tunnel between a clients and networks providing anycast services. It can also be used the other way to virtually locate a unicast service within anycasted networks. </p> <a name="anchor7"></a><br /><hr /> +<table summary="layout" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="2" class="TOCbug" align="right"><tr><td class="TOCbug"><a href="#toc"> TOC </a></td></tr></table> <a name="rfc.section.2.1.3"></a><h3>2.1.3. redundant tunnel connection of 2 networks</h3> <br /><hr class="insert" /> @@ -277,6 +346,7 @@ redundant tunnel connection of 2 networks</h3> <p>Network A has multiple routers, that act as gateway/tunnel endpoints to another network B. This is done to build a redundant encrypted tunnel connection between the two networks. All tunnel endpoints of network A share the same anycast address and all tunnel endpoints of network B share another anycast address. When a packet from network A gets transmitted to network B, it first arrives on one of network A's border routers. Which router is used is determined by network A's internal routing. This router encapsulates the package and sends it to the anycast address of the network B routers. The SATP packet arrives at one of network B's routers and gets decapsulated and routed to it's destination within network B. </p> <a name="anchor8"></a><br /><hr /> +<table summary="layout" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="2" class="TOCbug" align="right"><tr><td class="TOCbug"><a href="#toc"> TOC </a></td></tr></table> <a name="rfc.section.2.2"></a><h3>2.2. Encapsulation</h3> @@ -321,10 +391,12 @@ Tunneling of IPv6 over IPv4 with RTP payload </pre></div><table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="2" align="center"><tr><td align="center"><font face="monaco, MS Sans Serif" size="1"><b> Figure 4 </b></font><br /></td></tr></table><hr class="insert" /> <a name="anchor9"></a><br /><hr /> +<table summary="layout" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="2" class="TOCbug" align="right"><tr><td class="TOCbug"><a href="#toc"> TOC </a></td></tr></table> <a name="rfc.section.3"></a><h3>3. Using SATP on top of IP</h3> <a name="anchor10"></a><br /><hr /> +<table summary="layout" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="2" class="TOCbug" align="right"><tr><td class="TOCbug"><a href="#toc"> TOC </a></td></tr></table> <a name="rfc.section.3.1"></a><h3>3.1. Fragmentation</h3> @@ -335,16 +407,19 @@ Fragmentation</h3> <p>If the payload ip headers's Don't Fragment (DF) bit is set, than the DF bit of the outer ip header HAS TO be set as well. </p> <a name="anchor11"></a><br /><hr /> +<table summary="layout" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="2" class="TOCbug" align="right"><tr><td class="TOCbug"><a href="#toc"> TOC </a></td></tr></table> <a name="rfc.section.3.2"></a><h3>3.2. ICMP messages</h3> <p>ICMP messages MUST be relayed according to <a class='info' href='#RFC2003'>rfc2003 section 4<span> (</span><span class='info'>Perkins, C., “IP Encapsulation within IP,” October 1996.</span><span>)</span></a> [3]. This is needed for path MTU discover </p> <a name="anchor12"></a><br /><hr /> +<table summary="layout" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="2" class="TOCbug" align="right"><tr><td class="TOCbug"><a href="#toc"> TOC </a></td></tr></table> <a name="rfc.section.4"></a><h3>4. Protocol specification</h3> <a name="anchor13"></a><br /><hr /> +<table summary="layout" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="2" class="TOCbug" align="right"><tr><td class="TOCbug"><a href="#toc"> TOC </a></td></tr></table> <a name="rfc.section.4.1"></a><h3>4.1. Header format</h3> <br /><hr class="insert" /> @@ -374,24 +449,28 @@ Header format</h3> <p> </p> <a name="anchor14"></a><br /><hr /> +<table summary="layout" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="2" class="TOCbug" align="right"><tr><td class="TOCbug"><a href="#toc"> TOC </a></td></tr></table> <a name="rfc.section.4.2"></a><h3>4.2. sender ID</h3> <p>The sender ID is a 16bit unsigned integer. It HAS TO be unique for every sender sharing the same anycast address </p> <a name="anchor15"></a><br /><hr /> +<table summary="layout" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="2" class="TOCbug" align="right"><tr><td class="TOCbug"><a href="#toc"> TOC </a></td></tr></table> <a name="rfc.section.4.3"></a><h3>4.3. sequence number</h3> <p>The sequence number is a 32 bit unsigned integer in network byte order. It starts with a random value and is increased by 1 for every sent packet. After the maximum value, it starts over from 0. This overrun causes the ROC to be increased. </p> <a name="anchor16"></a><br /><hr /> +<table summary="layout" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="2" class="TOCbug" align="right"><tr><td class="TOCbug"><a href="#toc"> TOC </a></td></tr></table> <a name="rfc.section.4.4"></a><h3>4.4. payload</h3> <p>A packet of the type payload type (e.g. an IP packet). </p> <a name="anchor17"></a><br /><hr /> +<table summary="layout" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="2" class="TOCbug" align="right"><tr><td class="TOCbug"><a href="#toc"> TOC </a></td></tr></table> <a name="rfc.section.4.5"></a><h3>4.5. padding (OPTIONAL)</h3> @@ -400,12 +479,14 @@ None of the pre-defined encryption transforms uses any padding; for these, the plaintext and encrypted payload sizes match exactly. Transforms are based on transforms of the SRTP protocol and these transforms might use the RTP padding format, so a RTP like padding is supported. If padding field is present, than the padding count field MUST be set to the padding lenght. </p> <a name="anchor18"></a><br /><hr /> +<table summary="layout" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="2" class="TOCbug" align="right"><tr><td class="TOCbug"><a href="#toc"> TOC </a></td></tr></table> <a name="rfc.section.4.6"></a><h3>4.6. padding count</h3> <p>The number of octets of the padding field. This field is optional. It's presence is signaled by the key management and not by this protocol. If this field isn't present, the padding field MUST NOT be present as well. </p> <a name="anchor19"></a><br /><hr /> +<table summary="layout" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="2" class="TOCbug" align="right"><tr><td class="TOCbug"><a href="#toc"> TOC </a></td></tr></table> <a name="rfc.section.4.7"></a><h3>4.7. payload type field</h3> @@ -427,6 +508,7 @@ HEX <a name="anchor20"></a><br /><hr /> +<table summary="layout" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="2" class="TOCbug" align="right"><tr><td class="TOCbug"><a href="#toc"> TOC </a></td></tr></table> <a name="rfc.section.4.8"></a><h3>4.8. Encryption</h3> @@ -461,23 +543,34 @@ Encryption</h3> </pre></div><table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="2" align="center"><tr><td align="center"><font face="monaco, MS Sans Serif" size="1"><b> Figure 7 </b></font><br /></td></tr></table><hr class="insert" /> <a name="anchor21"></a><br /><hr /> +<table summary="layout" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="2" class="TOCbug" align="right"><tr><td class="TOCbug"><a href="#toc"> TOC </a></td></tr></table> <a name="rfc.section.5"></a><h3>5. Security Considerations</h3> <p>As satp uses the same encrytion technics as <a class='info' href='#RFC3711'>SRTP<span> (</span><span class='info'>Baugher, M., McGrew, D., Naslund, M., Carrara, E., and K. Norrman, “The Secure Real-time Transport Protocol (SRTP),” March 2004.</span><span>)</span></a> [1], it shares the same security issues. This section will only discuss some small changes. Please read <a class='info' href='#RFC3711'>SRTP RFC3711 section 9<span> (</span><span class='info'>Baugher, M., McGrew, D., Naslund, M., Carrara, E., and K. Norrman, “The Secure Real-time Transport Protocol (SRTP),” March 2004.</span><span>)</span></a> [1] for details. </p> <a name="anchor22"></a><br /><hr /> +<table summary="layout" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="2" class="TOCbug" align="right"><tr><td class="TOCbug"><a href="#toc"> TOC </a></td></tr></table> <a name="rfc.section.5.1"></a><h3>5.1. Replay protection</h3> <p>Replay protection is done by a replay list. Every anycast receiver has it's own replay list, which SOULDN'T be syncronised, because of massive overhead. This leads to an additional possible attack. A attacker is able to replay a captured packet once to every anycast reciever. This attack is considered of be very unlikely, because multiple attack hosts in different loactions are needed to reach the seperate anycast receivers and the number of replays is limited to the count of receivers - 1. Such replays might also happen because of routing problems, so a payload protocol HAS TO be robust against a small number of duplicated packages. The window size and position HAS TO be syncronised between multible anycast receivers to limit this attack. </p> -<a name="rfc.references"></a><br /><hr /> +<a name="anchor23"></a><br /><hr /> +<table summary="layout" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="2" class="TOCbug" align="right"><tr><td class="TOCbug"><a href="#toc"> TOC </a></td></tr></table> <a name="rfc.section.6"></a><h3>6. +IANA Considerations</h3> + +<p>To use the protocol on top of IP, UDP and TCP protocol numberes have to be +</p> +<a name="rfc.references"></a><br /><hr /> +<table summary="layout" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="2" class="TOCbug" align="right"><tr><td class="TOCbug"><a href="#toc"> TOC </a></td></tr></table> +<a name="rfc.section.7"></a><h3>7. References</h3> <a name="rfc.references1"></a><br /><hr /> -<h3>6.1. Normative References</h3> +<table summary="layout" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="2" class="TOCbug" align="right"><tr><td class="TOCbug"><a href="#toc"> TOC </a></td></tr></table> +<h3>7.1. Normative References</h3> <table width="99%" border="0"> <tr><td class="author-text" valign="top"><a name="RFC3711">[1]</a></td> <td class="author-text">Baugher, M., McGrew, D., Naslund, M., Carrara, E., and K. Norrman, “<a href="ftp://ftp.isi.edu/in-notes/rfc3711.txt">The Secure Real-time Transport Protocol (SRTP)</a>,” RFC 3711, March 2004.</td></tr> @@ -488,7 +581,8 @@ References</h3> </table> <a name="rfc.references2"></a><br /><hr /> -<h3>6.2. Informational References</h3> +<table summary="layout" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="2" class="TOCbug" align="right"><tr><td class="TOCbug"><a href="#toc"> TOC </a></td></tr></table> +<h3>7.2. Informational References</h3> <table width="99%" border="0"> <tr><td class="author-text" valign="top"><a name="RFC2784">[4]</a></td> <td class="author-text"><a href="mailto:dino@procket.com">Farinacci, D.</a>, <a href="mailto:tony1@home.net">Li, T.</a>, <a href="mailto:stan_hanks@enron.net">Hanks, S.</a>, <a href="mailto:dmm@cisco.com">Meyer, D.</a>, and <a href="mailto:pst@juniper.net">P. Traina</a>, “<a href="ftp://ftp.isi.edu/in-notes/rfc2784.txt">Generic Routing Encapsulation (GRE)</a>,” RFC 2784, March 2000.</td></tr> @@ -499,6 +593,7 @@ References</h3> </table> <a name="rfc.authors"></a><br /><hr /> +<table summary="layout" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="2" class="TOCbug" align="right"><tr><td class="TOCbug"><a href="#toc"> TOC </a></td></tr></table> <h3>Author's Address</h3> <table width="99%" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"> <tr><td class="author-text"> </td> @@ -517,6 +612,7 @@ References</h3> <td class="author-text"><a href="http://www.gsenger.com/satp/">http://www.gsenger.com/satp/</a></td></tr> </table> <a name="rfc.copyright"></a><br /><hr /> +<table summary="layout" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="2" class="TOCbug" align="right"><tr><td class="TOCbug"><a href="#toc"> TOC </a></td></tr></table> <h3>Full Copyright Statement</h3> <p class='copyright'> Copyright © The IETF Trust (2007).</p> diff --git a/internet-draft-satp.txt b/internet-draft-satp.txt index 34799c2..d399cfe 100644 --- a/internet-draft-satp.txt +++ b/internet-draft-satp.txt @@ -68,37 +68,37 @@ Abstract tunneling and relaying of packets of any protocol. +Table of Contents - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - + 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 + 1.1. Notational Conventions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 + 2. Motivation and usage scenarios . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 + 2.1. Usage scenarions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 + 2.1.1. tunneling from unicast hosts over anycast routers + to other unicast hosts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 + 2.1.2. tunneling from unicast hosts to anycast networks . . . 5 + 2.1.3. redundant tunnel connection of 2 networks . . . . . . 5 + 2.2. Encapsulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 + 3. Using SATP on top of IP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 + 3.1. Fragmentation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 + 3.2. ICMP messages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 + 4. Protocol specification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 + 4.1. Header format . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 + 4.2. sender ID . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 + 4.3. sequence number . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 + 4.4. payload . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 + 4.5. padding (OPTIONAL) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 + 4.6. padding count . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 + 4.7. payload type field . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 + 4.8. Encryption . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 + 5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 + 5.1. Replay protection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 + 6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 + 7. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 + 7.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 + 7.2. Informational References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 + Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 + Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements . . . . . . . . . . 17 @@ -673,9 +673,65 @@ Gsenger Expires September 2, 2007 [Page 12] Internet-Draft secure anycast tunneling protocol (satp) March 2007 -6. References +6. IANA Considerations + + To use the protocol on top of IP, UDP and TCP protocol numberes have + to be + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +Gsenger Expires September 2, 2007 [Page 13] + +Internet-Draft secure anycast tunneling protocol (satp) March 2007 + + +7. References -6.1. Normative References +7.1. Normative References [1] Baugher, M., McGrew, D., Naslund, M., Carrara, E., and K. Norrman, "The Secure Real-time Transport Protocol (SRTP)", @@ -687,7 +743,7 @@ Internet-Draft secure anycast tunneling protocol (satp) March 2007 [3] Perkins, C., "IP Encapsulation within IP", RFC 2003, October 1996. -6.2. Informational References +7.2. Informational References [4] Farinacci, D., Li, T., Hanks, S., Meyer, D., and P. Traina, "Generic Routing Encapsulation (GRE)", RFC 2784, March 2000. @@ -724,7 +780,7 @@ Internet-Draft secure anycast tunneling protocol (satp) March 2007 -Gsenger Expires September 2, 2007 [Page 13] +Gsenger Expires September 2, 2007 [Page 14] Internet-Draft secure anycast tunneling protocol (satp) March 2007 @@ -780,7 +836,7 @@ URIs -Gsenger Expires September 2, 2007 [Page 14] +Gsenger Expires September 2, 2007 [Page 15] Internet-Draft secure anycast tunneling protocol (satp) March 2007 @@ -836,7 +892,7 @@ Author's Address -Gsenger Expires September 2, 2007 [Page 15] +Gsenger Expires September 2, 2007 [Page 16] Internet-Draft secure anycast tunneling protocol (satp) March 2007 @@ -892,5 +948,5 @@ Acknowledgment -Gsenger Expires September 2, 2007 [Page 16] +Gsenger Expires September 2, 2007 [Page 17] diff --git a/internet-draft-satp.xml b/internet-draft-satp.xml index 19aec12..52bb4a1 100644 --- a/internet-draft-satp.xml +++ b/internet-draft-satp.xml @@ -9,6 +9,7 @@ <!ENTITY rfc2119 PUBLIC '' 'http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.2119.xml'> <!ENTITY rfc2003 PUBLIC '' 'http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.2003.xml'> ]> +<?rfc toc='yes'?> <rfc ipr='full3978' docName='draft-gsenger-secure-anycast-tunneling-protocol-00'> <front> <title>secure anycast tunneling protocol (satp)</title> @@ -266,6 +267,9 @@ HEX <t>Replay protection is done by a replay list. Every anycast receiver has it's own replay list, which SOULDN'T be syncronised, because of massive overhead. This leads to an additional possible attack. A attacker is able to replay a captured packet once to every anycast reciever. This attack is considered of be very unlikely, because multiple attack hosts in different loactions are needed to reach the seperate anycast receivers and the number of replays is limited to the count of receivers - 1. Such replays might also happen because of routing problems, so a payload protocol HAS TO be robust against a small number of duplicated packages. The window size and position HAS TO be syncronised between multible anycast receivers to limit this attack.</t> </section> </section> + <section title="IANA Considerations"> + <t>To use the protocol on top of IP, UDP and TCP protocol numberes have to be</t> + </section> </middle> <back> <references title="Normative References"> |