[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: resistance to swamping attacks.



John Gilmore <gnu@toad.com> says:
> So, my attempt:
>     Assume a system has a normal incoming communications bandwidth of
>     IX, a normal outgoing communications bandwidth of OX, ...  Then:
> 	    The system MUST be able to constructively use ...

I think your conditions are automatically satisfied for any protocol,
if you assume sufficient processing speed in the host.  If you don't
make that assumtion, that you have to specify the assumed processing
speed in some way, in order to get a bound on the computation you
will allow a candidate protocol to require.  And we all know what
happens to assumptions about processing power.
_________________________________________________________
Matt Crawford          crawdad@fnal.gov          Fermilab
  PGP: D5 27 83 7A 25 25 7D FB  09 3C BA 33 71 C4 DA 6A

From: narayanasamy senthil vadivu <senvad@hotmail.com>
To: ipsec@ans.net
Subject: Requirement for IPSEC SMIB
Content-Type: text/plain
Message-Id: <96Sep20.053114pdt.1461331(3)@constitution.hotmail.com>
Date: 	Fri, 20 Sep 1996 05:31:14 -0700
Sender: ipsec-approval@neptune.tis.com
Precedence: bulk

Dear Mr Steve Kent,
with reference to ur list of security attributes in the draft :
draft-ietf-ipsec-isakmp-05.txt regarding  ISAKMP
can u kindly give more inputs  on these each of these security 
attributes .U can mail back to kaushikb@future.futsoft.com

thanks/regards,
kaushik



---------------------------------------------------------
Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
---------------------------------------------------------




Follow-Ups: