Re: New iTrace proposal

On Fri, 17 Oct 2003, Mikael Olsson wrote:

>
> First out: the WG is officially dead. I doubt (though this isn't
> really for me to say) that the cleaned-up (experimental!) RFC will
> contain anything of material value that isn't already in it.

Yeah, I know it's dead. I was talking about it with Marcus Leech. But
experimental RFC can be of some use too, I think.
Maybe we should form a new WG? :))


> > So, mode 1 (generate iTrace messages, don't forward any others iTrace
> > messages) is designed for [nincompoops].
>
> Mandating such a mode means that suddenly all routers need to
> apply ACLish behavior on all traffic.  This was unlikely in
> the first place, and even less likely now.

Why? Because of routers performance overheat? What is the reason?



> > their network *can't* be flooded with iTrace messages
>
> No, but their internet connection can.

True. But they can keep theirs internal network immune to such attacks.
Better than nothing, I think.
And it's making iTrace as attractive to attackers as other blocked
protocols.


---
Tomasz Grabowski  (0-91)4494234
Akademickie Centrum Informatyki
mailto:[email protected]