RE: ISATAP, v6inv4 and 6to4 tunnel interworkings [RE: ISATAP vs a lter natives in 3GPP [Re: comments on draft-ietf-v6 ops-3gpp-analysis- 0 9 .txt] ]

["Karim El-Malki (HF/EAB)" <karim.el-malki@ericsson.com>]

 > > >Making it possible to send TTL=255 + LL packets from 
 > everywhere in the 
 > > >Internet breaks this assumption.
 > > 
 > > Well, we have made specific mention this assumption in 
 > past versions of
 > > the draft, e.g, see Security considerations in:
 > >   
 > > 
 > http://www.join.uni-muenster.de/Dokumente/drafts/draft-ietf-n
 > gtrans-isatap-03.txt
 > 
 > Too bad this was removed and apparently forgotten by many WG 
 > participatents :-(

Don't think it was forgotten. At least our implementation does
the checks. The IPv4 spoofing protection on edge routers is a valid
assumption and should be mandated anyway. But I agree that the
current spec could do with several changes like this one. I am trying
to put together a list of things which I would like to see in a new
version of the ISATAP spec.

/Karim