Re: reachability test verification (was Re: Comments on draft-bagnulo-multi6dt-hba-00.txt
marcelo bagnulo braun <[email protected]> Thu, 18 Nov 2004 15:03:59 +0100
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.multi6 |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <B1D0F896-396A-11D9-AEEC-000D93ACD0FE@it> |
El 17/11/2004, a las 17:56, Jari Arkko escribió: > marcelo bagnulo braun wrote: >> Hi Jari, >> El 16/11/2004, a las 20:38, Jari Arkko escribió: >>> As for the number of hash verifications, it would seem that >>> you only have to verify those addresses that you actually use >>> for exchanging packets with the peer. That is, if there is no >>> problem you don't necessarily have to verify anything. And >>> if you have a problem, it suffices to test the addresses >>> that you actually end up switching to instead. (I'm still >>> wondering whether the test packets sent to address X need >>> verification of X; there may be some denial-of-service issues >>> if we don't do that.) >>> >> The question would be: do we do the reachanility test first or the >> HBA verification first? is this what you have in mind? > > That was the question I had. It seems that it would be best > if you could verify HBA/CGA first and only then send a packet. > agree regards, marcelo > --Jari > > ------------------------------------------ Please note that my former email address [email protected] is no longer in use Please send mail to: marcelo at it dot uc3m dot es ------------------------------------------