Subject: Re: [P2PSIP] Merge of ASP and RELOAD - Version Notification for draft-bryan-p2psip-reload-02

From: Cullen Jennings <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 2 Dec 2007 13:39:04 -0800

On Nov 28, 2007, at 6:57 PM, Michael Chen wrote:

>
> I don't see where the protocol sends the originator's peer-ID. At  
> the end of section 4.1, it says the via list starts out empty and  
> the route list has the intermediate and destination peer IDs.  Say  
> A wants to reach C through B, then in the forwarding header sent by  
> A, the route-list contains [B, C], and the via list is empty.   
> Where does C or B for that matter know the peer ID of A when it's  
> time to send the respond back?
>
> Should the via-list in the forwarding header sent by A contains the  
> peer ID of A?

Yes, we do need the A to get in the list,  but the ID is inserted by  
B. The logic behind this had to do with some security issues and  
logic about what B inserts. B actually inserts the peer it perceives  
the message came from. This helps with spoofing return routes by  
having responses go to where they came from. Sorry this email is  
brief, I will try and write a clearer one if this does make sense.

>
> Also, any comment of my earlier suggestion in this thread about  
> swapping the position of the via list and route list?

sorry for slow reply on this - yes - I think this is a good idea. I  
want to talk to co-authors about it and then put it in the next  
version the draft. I had not got the time to do this yet and I was  
leaving your email in my inbox as a TODO reminder.

Cullen <with my individual hat on>

_______________________________________________
P2PSIP mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/p2psip