![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Nicholas Weaver wrote:
On Jun 8, 2008, at 10:41 PM, Joe Touch wrote:...EG, the ISP can at a single bidirectional point in the network (admittedly keeping lots of state, but...) for a large group of users infer the congestion on each TCP flow,...That's the point, however, where things stop when someone uses encrypted transport layers.As long as the end point address is NOT encrypted, it doesn't matter.
How might I infer the congestion on each TCP flow when I can't see TCP connections, e.g.?
...Yes, this is a LOT of engineering work to get right [1], but I believe it is doable, and could accomplish the stated definition of fairness (or something very close to it).A key question is whether it's worth the state it will take to get right. An endpoint might open a few thousand flows just to help overload your system ;-)
... ...
c) If a single host or small group of hosts starts doing behavior designed to disrupt the flow cache deliberately (eg, >10k ACTIVE TCP flows), I think the ISPs device can start doing some rate limiting on flow creation as well, as there is a strong case that such is suspicious behavior.
How can you infer that >10K flows from a host is deliberate disruption? If I buy an Internet connection from an ISP, I get as many flows as I can connect to.
Or have you decided that "the Internet" is now only as many flows as you can track efficiently? (see below)
Furthermore, you can resist the attacks you mentioned. Because the ISP can prevent the user from minting new IP addresses (as they control the point of attachment), this prevents address forging.Sure - the local ISP can prevent that. You can't prevent someone accessing multiple ISPs (cable, DSL, etc.), but presumably you don't care about that?Yeah, why should the ISP care? Its because common congestion pretty much only occurs within the ISP, so it is the ISP's problem to mitigate, and in the ISP's interest to mitigate.Someone who's using multiple ISPs to transfer more bits is paying for those extra bits, and it doesn't really matter.
Maybe I'm missing something, but if I have one ISP, I paid for THOSE bits too. How I use them is up to me, not the ISP.
Joe
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ p2pi mailing list p2pi at ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/p2pi