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

RE: Some comments on JFK

To: "'EKR'" <ekr@rtfm.com>, "Angelos D. Keromytis" <angelos@cs.columbia.edu>
Subject: RE: Some comments on JFK
From: "Hallam-Baker, Phillip" <pbaker@verisign.com>
Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2001 11:03:22 -0800
Cc: ipsec@lists.tislabs.com
Sender: owner-ipsec@lists.tislabs.com

> Yes, but purpose of forcing the initiator to spend cycles before the
> responder is for DoS prevention, not rate throttling of legitimate
> initiators, no?

Carefull, you don't 'force' the initiator to spend cycles before the
responder. What you actually do is to force the initiator to prove that
it can recieve packets sent to the purported initiator address before 
the responder spends cycles.

The initiator can send any old junk to the respinder and the responder
will not know until the cycles are spent.

	Phill

Phillip

Follow-Ups:

Re: Some comments on JFK

From: Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com>

Prev by Date: RE: compare-jfk-sigma.txt
Next by Date: Re: Some comments on JFK
Prev by thread: Re: Some comments on JFK
Next by thread: Re: Some comments on JFK
Index(es):
- Main
- Thread