Subject: [Mip6] rr weaknesses?

From: Jari Arkko <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2004 03:40:16 +0200

In reading Francis' draft on bombing I came across the following
statement:

    As the return
    routability is not considered by many people as very safe or
    efficient, some new ways to

I agree about the efficiency part*.

But I'm wondering if you have any specific worries about the
safety part. I mean beyond issues that already exist in plain
IPv4 and IPv6, such as MitMs being able to do bad things.

--Jari

*) Well, I guess on the overall scheme of things, 1 RTT can be considered
relatively effient. But of course we'd like to get rid of even that...
and there are applications that need faster operation.

_______________________________________________
Mip6 mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6

---

From: Francis Dupont <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2004 11:28:04 +0100

In your previous mail you wrote:

       As the return

   
=> the RR of Mobile IPv6 has all packets in clear somewhere in the Internet.
IMHO the real issue is the RR assumptions are a bit weak, so it is not
a surprise that with stronger assumptions (strong authentication available
for instance) we can get safer mechanisms. To be short do you agree that
HIP is safer than current Mobile IPv6 RR?

Regards

[email-masked]

PS: we can poll the WG to see whether many people consider that RR is not very
safe if you'd like (:-).