1996-03-12 - Re: FCC & Internet phones

Header Data

From: “Perry E. Metzger” <perry@piermont.com>
To: Gary Howland <gary@kampai.euronet.nl>
Message Hash: b16af7cc6362f834aa19c0a8e2c0bc8d6fbc3756e830848e81e0a68b23a11849
Message ID: <199603121658.LAA01954@jekyll.piermont.com>
Reply To: <199603121049.FAA20806@bb.hks.net>
UTC Datetime: 1996-03-12 20:04:55 UTC
Raw Date: Wed, 13 Mar 1996 04:04:55 +0800

Raw message

From: "Perry E. Metzger" <perry@piermont.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 1996 04:04:55 +0800
To: Gary Howland <gary@kampai.euronet.nl>
Subject: Re: FCC & Internet phones
In-Reply-To: <199603121049.FAA20806@bb.hks.net>
Message-ID: <199603121658.LAA01954@jekyll.piermont.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



Gary Howland writes:
> Adam Shostack wrote:
> > 
> >         Are you willing to play Mallet?  Drop IP packets, and look for
> > duplicates.  Those are TCP.  (IPSEC might handle this, but I bet there
> > will be broken implementations that save time by resending.)

Since the TCP and IP layers are not the same, this won't happen. The
retransmit occurs at the TCP layer and the IP layer will re-encrypt
with a new initialization vector.

> Are you saying UDP protocols don't retransmit un-acked packets?
> If not, then you can't be sure the duplicates are TCP.

Also true. Plus there are IPSEC transforms being talked about that
will put in replay elimination, so I doubt this is going to be a
problem.

On the other hand, you can detect TCP packets pretty easily by timing
them. They will usually follow a nice Van J. algorithm profile.

Perry





Thread