-
"Improving TCP's Robustness to Blind In-Window Attacks", Anantha Ramaiah, Randall Stewart, Mitesh Dalal, 2-Nov-08. ( bytes)
- TCP has historically been considered protected against spoofed off-
path packet injection attacks by relying on the fact that it is
difficult to guess the 4-tuple (the source and destination IP
addresses and the source and destination ports) in combination with
the 32 bit sequence number(s). A combination of increasing window
sizes and applications using longer term connections (e.g. H-323 or
Border Gateway Protocol [RFC4271]) have left modern TCP
implementations more vulnerable to these types of spoofed packet
injection attacks.
Many of these long term TCP applications tend to have predictable IP
addresses and ports which makes it far easier for the 4-tuple
(4-tuple is the same as the socket pair mentioned in [RFC0793]) to be
guessed. Having guessed the 4-tuple correctly, an attacker can
inject a TCP segment with the RST bit set, the SYN bit set or data
into a TCP connection by systematically guessing the sequence number
of the spoofed segment to be in the current receive window. This can
cause the connection to abort or cause data corruption. This
document specifies small modifications to the way TCP handles inbound
segments that can reduce the chances of a successful attack.
-
"TCP Congestion Control", Vern Paxson, Ethan Blanton, Mark Allman, 14-May-09. ( bytes)
- This document defines TCP's four intertwined congestion control
algorithms: slow start, congestion avoidance, fast retransmit, and
fast recovery. In addition, the document specifies how TCP should
begin transmission after a relatively long idle period, as well as
discussing various acknowledgment generation methods.
-
"ICMP attacks against TCP", Fernando Gont, 4-Jun-09. ( bytes)
- This document discusses the use of the Internet Control Message
Protocol (ICMP) to perform a variety of attacks against the
Transmission Control Protocol (TCP) and other similar protocols.
Additionally, describes a number of widely implemented modifications
to TCP's handling of ICMP error messages that help to mitigate these
issues.
-
"Forward RTO-Recovery (F-RTO): An Algorithm for Detecting Spurious Retransmission Timeouts with TCP", Pasi Sarolahti, Markku Kojo, Kazunori Yamamoto, Max Hata, 30-Oct-08. ( bytes)
- The purpose of this document is to move the F-RTO functionality for
TCP in RFC 4138 from Experimental to Standards Track status. The F-
RTO support for SCTP in RFC 4138 remains with Experimental status.
See Appendix B for the differences between this document and RFC
4138.
Spurious retransmission timeouts cause suboptimal TCP performance
because they often result in unnecessary retransmission of the last
window of data. This document describes the F-RTO detection
algorithm for detecting spurious TCP retransmission timeouts. F-RTO
is a TCP sender-only algorithm that does not require any TCP options
to operate. After retransmitting the first unacknowledged segment
triggered by a timeout, the F-RTO algorithm of the TCP sender
monitors the incoming acknowledgments to determine whether the
timeout was spurious. It then decides whether to send new segments
or retransmit unacknowledged segments. The algorithm effectively
helps to avoid additional unnecessary retransmissions and thereby
improves TCP performance in the case of a spurious timeout.
-
"The TCP Authentication Option", Joseph Touch, Allison Mankin, Ronald Bonica, 3-Jul-09. ( bytes)
- This document specifies the TCP Authentication Option (TCP-AO), which
obsoletes the TCP MD5 Signature option of RFC-2385 (TCP MD5). TCP-AO
specifies the use of stronger Message Authentication Codes (MACs),
protects against replays even for long-lived TCP connections, and
provides more details on the association of security with TCP
connections than TCP MD5. TCP-AO is compatible with either static
master key tuple (MKT) configuration or an external, out-of-band MKT
management mechanism; in either case, TCP-AO also protects
connections when using the same MKT across repeated instances of a
connection, using traffic keys derived from the MKT, and coordinates
MKT changes between endpoints. The result is intended to support
current infrastructure uses of TCP MD5, such as to protect long-lived
connections (as used, e.g., in BGP and LDP), and to support a larger
set of MACs with minimal other system and operational changes. TCP-AO
uses its own option identifier, even though used mutually exclusive
of TCP MD5 on a given TCP connection. TCP-AO supports IPv6, and is
fully compatible with the requirements for the replacement of TCP
MD5.
-
"TCP Extensions for High Performance", David Borman, Robert Braden, Van Jacobson, 4-Mar-09. ( bytes)
- This memo presents a set of TCP extensions to improve performance
over large bandwidth*delay product paths and to provide reliable
operation over very high-speed paths. It defines TCP options for
scaled windows and timestamps, which are designed to provide
compatible interworking with TCP's that do not implement the
extensions. The timestamps are used for two distinct mechanisms:
RTTM (Round Trip Time Measurement) and PAWS (Protection Against
Wrapped Sequences). Selective acknowledgments are not included in
this memo.
This memo updates and obsoletes RFC 1323.
-
"Early Retransmit for TCP and SCTP", Mark Allman, Konstantin Avrachenkov, Urtzi Ayesta, Ethan Blanton, Per Hurtig, 14-Jan-09. ( bytes)
- This document proposes a new mechanism for TCP and SCTP that can be
used to recover lost segments when a connection's congestion window is
small. The "Early Retransmit" mechanism allows the transport to reduce, in
certain special circumstances, the number of duplicate acknowledgments required
to trigger a fast retransmission. This allows the transport to use fast
retransmit to recover packet losses that would otherwise require a lengthy
retransmission timeout.
-
"TCP Options and MSS", David Borman, 4-Mar-09. ( bytes)
- This memo discusses what value to use with the TCP MSS option.
-
"On the implementation of TCP urgent data", Fernando Gont, Andrew Yourtchenko, 20-May-09. ( bytes)
- This document analyzes how current TCP implementations process TCP
urgent indications, and how the behavior of some widely-deployed
middle-boxes affect how urgent indications are processed by end
systems. This document updates the relevant specifications such that
they accommodate current practice in processing TCP urgent
indications, and raises awareness about the reliability of TCP urgent
indications in the current Internet.
IETF Secretariat - Please send questions, comments, and/or
suggestions to ietf-web@ietf.org.
Return to Internet-Draft directory.
Return to IETF home page.