On 7/19/2017 12:41 AM, Olivier Bonaventure wrote: > Joe, > >> - but I remain concerned with "injection piggybacking" > > To which section of the draft are you referring to ? It starts in the arch discussion in Sec 2:
As shown in Figure 3, the Converter places its supplied information inside the handshake packets. That's what I refer to as "injection piggybacking" With TCP, the Converter protocol places the destination address and port number of the final Server in the payload of the SYN. And that is the part that violates RFC793 semantics when that SYN reaches the final destination rather than the server-side proxy. To be clear, I'm not interested in further trying to "fix" this mechanism so it can work. It can't and it shouldn't IMO. Let's use our cycles for more productive things. Joe _______________________________________________ Int-area mailing list Int-area@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
