[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: security requirement for multi6
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
This is not really leading us anywhere...
>> Then please post to the list.
> It was posted to the list on this thread on the same day you post
> your opinion, which quoted part of my post.
Uhm, I replied to a mail from Iljitsch, that had replied to your
>I should state an elementary fact again.
>DoS is so easy.
>That is, that you happen to find a way of DoS does not mean other
>forms of DoS is not possible.
I then went on to say that although DOS attacks are a fact of life,
that does not mean that when designing future solutions, and we
discover new possible DOS attacks, and we at the same time knows how to
fix them - that we should ignore that.
You then said in a reply to my message that
>What is your point?
>The current situation is that there are DoS possibilities that we
>(I, at least) already know about.
And my question was :
If you know of DOS possibilities against id/loc split models such as
NOID or SIM or others, that are not described in
draft-nordmark-multi6-threats-00.txt, then please mail a description of
those to the multi6 list. If you also have suggestions or know how to
prevent against those attacks, include that.
If you can't describe any new threats I think we can kill this thread.
- - kurtis -
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP 8.0.2
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----