Re: draft-zourzouvillys-sip-via-cookie-00

Dean Willis <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.ietf.sip
Message-ID <[email protected]>
On Feb 20, 2009, at 9:53 AM, Michael Procter wrote:

> Henry Sinnreich wrote:
>>> it's trying to stop SIP servers being used as DOS amplifiers.
>>
>> If you take this viewpoint, then the fewer servers, the less
>> vulnerability?
>>
>> Henry
>
> In this context, "SIP server" means both proxies and UAs (at least,
> their UAS component).  Eliminating B2BUAs (which I think is what you
> were getting at) sadly won't eliminate this attack.
>

I believe Henry would also like to reduce proxies. I'm becoming more  
and more fond of this as a general design principle. Quite possibly,  
the only proxies we should have are ones that provide the outbound/ 
registrar/rendezvous function set. And that's just because we don't  
have those functions at a lower transport level. Other proxy functions  
(like application dispatch and delivery)  may be pointless exercises  
in futility. A working HIP-like transport layer could eliminate the  
outbound/registrar/rendezvous functions.

Most of the other "proxy" functions  we've discussed are probably  
better as UA functions.

Of course, that doesn't help with an attack mode that turns UAs into  
amplifiers . . .

--
Dean

_______________________________________________
Sip mailing list  https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip
This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol
Use [email protected] for questions on current sip
Use [email protected] for new developments on the application of sip
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.