Re: Re: regarding INIT ACK from different destination IP.

Bhanu,

That passage does not say to drop the INIT-ACK.

--brian

Bhanu Prakash wrote:                                                 (Tue, 26 Sep 2006 13:16:27)
> 
>    Brian,
>    Please refer RFC-4460:
>    ************************************************
>    2.36.2.  Text Changes to the Document
>       ---------
>       Old text: None
>       ---------
>       ---------
>       New text: (Section 5.4)
>       ---------
>       5.4.  Path Verification
>       During association establishment, the two peers exchange a list of
>        addresses.   In  the  predominant  case,  these  lists  accurately
>    represent
>       the addresses owned by each peer.  However, it is possible that a
>       misbehaving peer may supply addresses that it does not own.  To
>        prevent  this, the following rules are applied to all addresses of
>    the
>       new association:
>        1) Any address passed to the sender of the INIT by its upper layer
>    is
>          automatically considered to be CONFIRMED.
>        2)  For the receiver of the COOKIE-ECHO the only CONFIRMED address
>    is
>          the one that the INIT-ACK was sent to.
>       3) All other addresses not covered by rules 1 and 2 are considered
>          UNCONFIRMED and are subject to probing for verification.
>    ******************************************************************
>    In  this  case  since  the  INIT-ACK  is received from an un-confirmed
>    address, should
>    it be accepted or not..?
>    Thanks
>    Bhanuprakash.
>    Brian F. G. Bidulock wrote:
> 
> Padmalochan,
> 
> Padmalochan Moharana wrote:         (Tue, 26 Sep 2006 00:17:42)
>   
> 
> Hi Brian
> 
> please suggest for the following doubt.
> 
> Should endoint (in case of Multi-homed), encode COOKIE
> ECHO on receive the INIT_ACK from a different
> destination IP of the INIT or it should  ignores the
> INIT_ACK.
>     
> 
> If the INIT_ACK corresponds to an INIT that was sent (addresses
> in the address list, verification tag, parameters and a cookie),
> send the COOKIE ECHO.
> 
> Why would you think otherwise?
> 
> --brian
> 
>   

-- 
Brian F. G. Bidulock
[email protected]
http://www.openss7.org/