[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: security requirement for multi6
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On torsdag, nov 13, 2003, at 05:27 Europe/Stockholm, Masataka Ohta
> Kurt Erik Lindqvist wrote:
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>> Hash: SHA1
>> On torsdag, nov 13, 2003, at 00:33 Europe/Stockholm, Iljitsch van
>> Beijnum wrote:
>>> Still, I think this new kind of denial of service is bad enough that
>>> we shouldn't allow this to happen, even though other denial of
>>> service attacks are also possible today. Hopefully we'll be able to
>>> do something about that in the future.
>> Just because there are DoS possibilities that we do not yet know
>> about, does not mean that we should not fix the ones that we do know
>> about, and also know how to fix.
> What is your point?
> The current situation is that there are DoS possibilities that we
> (I, at least) already know about.
In the id/loc separation case? That are not in Eriks draft? Then this
is the time to list them. If you know how to work around them, even
- - kurtis -
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP 8.0.2
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----