Re: TCP end-to-end Semantics

From: [email protected]
Date: Tue Jan 09 2001 - 22:48:06 EST

  • Next message: Anil Agarwal: "Re: Re: TCP end-to-end Semantics"

    Hi,

    The requirement is that a TCP session, once it starts in spoofed mode continues
    thenceforth
    in spoofing mode unless there is a graceful closure. A route change that causes
    one of the
    spoofers to be removed from the path, will not be tolerated by most spoofers
    that I know of.
    However, this isn't as severe a restriction as it sounds.....most spoofers that
    I know operate
    on access networks where there is only one point of attachment.

    It would be interesting if there has been any study on spoofers that do tolerate
    these route
    changes. What about snoopers, or soft-state spoofers? Do they suffer from the
    same problem?

    -very best regards,
    Abheek

    [email protected] wrote:
    >
    > Can somebody come up with some examples of practical, relevant applications
    > that will fail under spoofing?

    What about any connection whose spoofed ACKs cause the sender's window to
    reuse offsets (i.e., roll-around), and then has a change in the
    path that causes the spoofer (with its state) to be outside the path?

    The result will _look_ like a successful transfer, but result
    in corruption.

    Joe



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Jan 09 2001 - 23:43:44 EST