Subject: RE: Summary of work areas

From: "Christian Huitema" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 20:05:39 -0800

My own list of task includes:

- description of an incremental roadmap that makes "business sense"
- solving the egress filtering issue (including when addresses cannot be
rewritten)
- selection of a first pair of address/locator to "establish contact",
either from application to TCP (as in the DT2 proposal or in the NOID
proposal) or from identifier to locator (in the SIM proposal)
- learning the set of addresses/locators associated to the
"distinguished address/locator" (common to DT2 proposal and NOID -- the
DNS is only one of many possibilities)
- decision algorithm for actually triggering the use of a different set
of addresses/locators for an ongoing TCP connection (we should consider
the trade-off between routing events, mobility events, and transport
events such as retransmit on timer)
- threat model & possible mitigations of the various attacks

-- Christian Huitema

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On
> Behalf Of Kurt Erik Lindqvist
> Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2003 7:46 PM
> To: Tony Li
> Cc: [email-masked]
> Subject: Re: Summary of work areas
> 
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> 
> Oh, and I think the bootstrap/start-up face that Margaret and others
> brought up is something that should be on the list.
> 
> - - kurtis -
> 
> On onsdag, nov 12, 2003, at 21:02 Europe/Stockholm, Tony Li wrote:
> 
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > To help Elliot out, I'd like for us to start thinking
> > about our top level work items.  As top level items,
> > they should, IMHO, be as independent as possible (tho
> > not wholly independent).  They should not be nested and
> > they should not be about the details.
> >
> > Here's a strawman:
> >
> >
> > Threat analysis
> > Locator storage & distribution
> > Mappings between locators, identifiers, and FQDNs
> > Security solutions
> > Exit addressing
> >
> > Additions, modifications?
> >
> > Tony
> >
> 
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: PGP 8.0.2
> 
> iQA/AwUBP7L+YKarNKXTPFCVEQICiACdFjR3qVo8No4pMrzHdLqJhZ628TUAoLpV
> CMtZwn3Q2m8V3ibnTY+sIHdn
> =J+q6
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>

---

From: Cedric de Launois <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 10:10:17 +0100

I'm currently working on a document that classify solutions to the
numerous high-level problems related to multiadressed multihomed IPv6
end-sites. I mention actual propositions (HIP, NOID, SCTP...) only
as examples that illustrate a particular way to solve a problem.

I divided the problems into five categories :
- Destination Locator Retrieval and Selection
- Source Locator Selection
- Failure Detection
- Preservation of Security
- Traffic Engineering

The complete table of content is copy/paste'd below.

The document is not finished yet. I hope it will help fixing the ideas.

-- Cedric

Table of Contents

   1.    Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  4

   2.    Terminology  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  4

   3.    Destination Locator Retrieval and Selection  . . . . . . . .  4
   3.1   Retrieval  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  4
   3.1.1 From the Domain Name System  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  4
   3.1.2 From a Dedicated Service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  4
   3.1.3 Using Transport-Level Protocol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  4
   3.2   Stack Levels for the Destination Locator Selection . . . . .  5
   3.2.1 Application-Level  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  5
   3.2.2 Transport-Level  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  5
   3.2.3 Between IP and Transport Levels  . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  5
   3.2.4 IP-Level . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  5
   3.3   Destination Locator Selection Mechanisms . . . . . . . . . .  6
   3.3.1 Experimentation-Based Selection  . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  6
   3.3.2 Using Routing Protocols  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  6

   4.    Source Locator Selection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  6
   4.1   Stack Levels for the Source Locator Selection  . . . . . . .  6
   4.1.1 Application-Level  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  7
   4.1.2 Transport-Level  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  7
   4.1.3 Between IP and Transport Levels  . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  7
   4.1.4 IP-Level . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  7
   4.2   Source Locator Selection Mechanisms  . . . . . . . . . . . .  7
   4.2.1 Using Routing Protocols  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  7
   4.2.2 Automatic Selection by IP Infrastructure . . . . . . . . . .  8
   4.2.3 Infrastructure-Driven Selection  . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  8

   5.    Failure Detection  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  8
   5.1   End-to-End Keepalive . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  8
   5.2   Passive Detection  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  9
   5.3   Using Routing Protocols  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  9

   6.    Preservation of Established Communication Sessions . . . . . 10
   6.1   Application-Level  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
   6.2   Session-Level  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
   6.3   Transport-Level  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
   6.4   Between IP and Transport Levels  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
   6.5   IP Level . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

   7.    Preservation of Security . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

   8.    Ingress Filtering Issue  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
   8.1   Relaxing the Source Address Check  . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
   8.2   Source Address Based Routing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
   8.3   Ensuring Right Source Address Selection by the Host  . . . . 12
   8.4   Packet Rewriting at Exit Router  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

   9.    Traffic Engineering  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
   9.1   Outbound Traffic Engineering . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
   9.1.1 Infrastructure-Driven Traffic Engineering  . . . . . . . . . 14
   9.1.2 Host-Driven Traffic Engineering  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
   9.2   Inbound Traffic Engineering  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

---

From: Brian E Carpenter <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 21:34:10 +0100

Cedric,

That sounds like very useful work, but can you figure out how to avoid
duplication of effort with Eliot's promised draft?

   Brian