Can i request the authors to post a revised ID fixing the
Authentication details in the OSPF header. At present, i am confused
as i dont see the Key ID, Sequence Numbers anywhere in the packets.

I agree that some discussion on overloading of the Hellos must happen.
However, i would also like to see some discussion on whether the
proposed mechanism of Nonces and Session IDs would work. I think that
is the key element in this work. If that is verified then everything
else can be built around that.

Glen

On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 12:07 AM, Michael Barnes <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi Sam,
>
> On 01/19/2011 10:13 AM, Sam Hartman wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Michael" == Michael Barnes<[email protected]>  writes:
>>
>>     Michael>  Hi Sam,
>>     Michael>  On 01/14/2011 04:34 AM, Sam Hartman wrote:
>>     >>  We could have separate authentication challenge packets.
>>     >>  However, the advantage of the current approach is that I think we
>>     >>  can get to a point where we have one or two extra packets total
>>     >>  for a cold-start situation, rather than an extra packet or two
>>     >>  per neighbor.  I don't know that the current rules for receiving
>>     >>  and sending packets actually achieve this, but I believe we can
>>     >>  get there with some minor changes.
>>
>>     Michael>  I've been giving this some thought, and I think exchanging
>>     Michael>  a couple of additional packets in the cold start situation
>>     Michael>  is more desirable than overloading the Hello packet with an
>>     Michael>  additional security role. The Hello packet already services
>>     Michael>  two very important purposes - discovery and keep alive. It
>>     Michael>  is highly desirable not to add to the processing overhead
>>     Michael>  for these packets.
>>
>> I'd like to understand your concerns here.  Are you concerned about CPU
>> for processing the hello packet? Bandwidth of the hello packets?  I'd
>> like to actually get educated about the tradeoffs enough that I can have
>> an intelligent discussion.
>
> I don't think the bandwidth is really an issue, but CPU is. It is important
> that processing of these packets can be completed as quickly as possible. We
> are constantly being asked to scale to ever larger number of neighbors and
> adding overhead to Hello packets could make this security mechanism
> undesirable in those settings.
>
> Regards,
> Michael
> _______________________________________________
> karp mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/karp
>
_______________________________________________
OSPF mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf

Reply via email to