[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Selector fields for ICMP in Arch doc
Michael,
> One point that I think ICMP group is unanimous is that the SPD/SAD support
>for ICMP. We feel that it should be extended to include ICMP type and code
>fields as selectors.
>
> Matt Crawford has suggested that since the architecture document provides
>a minimum set, the IPv6 people can impose additional requirements if they
>need.
> The question is do we want to make these an item for the IPv4 Standard's
>Arch document? I suggest that the text read like:
> "An implementation MAY support ICMP as a selector for the SAD. If an
> implementation does support ICMP, then it MUST support both ICMP
> type and code as selectors"
>
> Stephen? What say you?
I agree that we should extend the architecture doc to include selectors for
ICMP processing, as part of a more comprehensive ICMP processing
description, under IPsecond.
> This has ramifications for IKE as well: however, if you consider type/code
>to be a 16 bit item, you might pretend that it is the "port" field. I suggest
>that type be made the MSB and code the LSB.
>
> [do we have RFCs yet???? Do we even have numbers?]
Yes, the numbers are 2401-2412. Jon assigned them prior to his death, to
allow us to cite them appropriately in a National Reserach Council report
that Bellovin and I worked on.
Steve
References: