[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [saag] draft-stjohns-sipso-05 & transport protocols



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1



Bill Sommerfeld wrote:
> On Fri, 2008-10-03 at 06:58 -0700, Joe Touch wrote:
> 
>> There appears to be at least one change that might be required by all
>> Internet hosts; current behavior upon receipt of an IP packet at a
>> security level not supported is to send a TCP RST. This document
>> indicates that such hosts MUST silently drop such packets.
> 
> In a securely-configured MLS environment, systems not running an MLS
> operating system will never receive a packet with an MLS label -- if
> they did, that inherently means that an MLS system somewhere is
> misconfigured and information is flowing in violation of the MLS policy.
> 
> It is IMHO not necessary to specify what a label-unaware system should
> do with a labeled packet -- if they get one at all, it's a serious error
> on the part of the sender.

Serious errors occur all the time. The expected behavior of the MLS in
interacting with a non-MLS endpoint should be explained *when* that happens.

>>> 2) MLS operating systems have different requirements:
>>>   In turn, this specification *only* applies to Multi-Level
>>>   Secure (MLS) operating systems that choose to implement
>>>   this particular IPv6 labelling specification.  The draft
>>>   is very clear about this.
>> The draft does not appear to indicate how an MLS system would interact
>> with legacy systems that are not updated.
> 
> are you asking about labeled or unlabeled interoperability?

Both, since you brought it up, but I was originally thinking of unlabeled.

> the MLS systems I'm familiar with are configured with policy indicating
> the clearances of other hosts.  That policy can indicate whether or not
> packets to the other system should contain an explicit MLS label. 
> 
> non-MLS systems will typically never see a label.

Agreed, but (as above), this still needs to be explicit in this doc IMO.

Joe
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iEYEARECAAYFAkjmNnwACgkQE5f5cImnZrvxMwCdGlmhiMSi3r3bPo0B6abiIl3X
gKsAoORmH5FjuWI8MwC7L4G9hhGdoHFj
=bx1E
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
saag mailing list
saag at ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/saag



Note Well: Messages sent to this mailing list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.