nanog mailing list archives
Re: UDP/123 policers & status
From: Harlan Stenn <stenn () nwtime org>
Date: Mon, 30 Mar 2020 02:08:18 -0700
On 3/30/2020 2:01 AM, Ragnar Sundblad wrote:
On 30 Mar 2020, at 08:18, Saku Ytti <saku () ytti fi> wrote: On Mon, 30 Mar 2020 at 01:58, Ragnar Sundblad <ragge () kth se> wrote:A protocol with varying packet size, as the NTS protected NTP is, can easily have the bad property of having responses larger than the requests if not taken care. Don’t you see that?Why? Why not pad requests to guarantee attenuation vector until authenticity of packets can be verified?Right, and NTS does that.
There is more to NTP than NTS. Are y'all seriously recommending that NTP always sends a max-sized packet as a client request so the client/server can send back an identical response? The alternative seems to be that the client sends a smaller request and is ready when the response from the server is "Send your request again, but this time pad it to NNN bytes so I can respond with the same sized packet"?
Ragnar
-- Harlan Stenn <stenn () nwtime org> http://networktimefoundation.org - be a member!
Current thread:
- Re: UDP/123 policers & status, (continued)
- Re: UDP/123 policers & status Harlan Stenn (Mar 28)
- Re: UDP/123 policers & status Ragnar Sundblad (Mar 29)
- Re: UDP/123 policers & status Harlan Stenn (Mar 28)
- Re: UDP/123 policers & status Ragnar Sundblad (Mar 29)
- Re: UDP/123 policers & status Saku Ytti (Mar 29)
- Re: UDP/123 policers & status Harlan Stenn (Mar 30)
- Re: UDP/123 policers & status Saku Ytti (Mar 30)
- Re: UDP/123 policers & status Harlan Stenn (Mar 30)
- Re: UDP/123 policers & status Saku Ytti (Mar 30)
- Re: UDP/123 policers & status Ragnar Sundblad (Mar 30)
- Re: UDP/123 policers & status Harlan Stenn (Mar 30)
- Re: UDP/123 policers & status Saku Ytti (Mar 30)
- Re: UDP/123 policers & status Ragnar Sundblad (Mar 30)
- Re: UDP/123 policers & status Ragnar Sundblad (Mar 29)
