Re: PI/metro/geo [Re: The state of IPv6 multihoming development]

[Masataka Ohta <mohta@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp>]

Tony Li;

> |   > And forged 
> |   > identifiers are trivial today.  
> |   
> |   By closely associating the identifier with the locator, forgery that
> |   actually results in a usable connection is traceable and
> |   compartmentalized with natural trust boundaries. 
> 
> 
> Yeah, but a connection is only ONE means of exchanging data.  Do you trust
> the single UDP DNS query?

16 bit ID in DNS messages is the cookie.

> I would happily agree that anything that is going to update the locator
> entries in DNS needs to be secured.  I would expect that this would
> be part of normal manual DNS updates for multihomed sites and some
> secure protocol would be involved for mobile hosts.

Why do you think DNS must be updated for multihoming?

> This seems very
> much analogous to what we have in v4 today.  Is there some issue with
> this approach?

So, multihoming mechanism should be unified with mobility.

							Masataka Ohta