Index: [Article Count Order] [Thread]

Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2007 16:41:16 -0400
From: Zhiyong Wu <zwu@redhat.com>
Subject: [users:00387] Re: About IPv6 type 0 routing headers issue
To: Yukiyo Akisada <akisada@tahi.org>
Cc: users@tahi.org
Message-Id: <470D38EC.9090907@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <20071010172439.32bc468e.akisada@tahi.org>
References: <46FEB2D7.6040407@redhat.com>	<20071001163948.2a5d788a.akisada@tahi.org>	<470D2141.4080801@redhat.com> <20071010172439.32bc468e.akisada@tahi.org>
X-Mail-Count: 00387

Hi, akisada.
   
    I am glad to see the good news about major revision release from you.

    Thank you again for your rely on time.



    Regards,

    Zhiyong Wu



Yukiyo Akisada wrote:
> Hi, Zhiyong.
>
> In this moment, we will support RH0 as selectable function.
> But it may be changed to be mandatory
> because RH0 ID was already entered in RFC Editor Queue few days ago.
>
> Now, situation around RH0 is changed day by day.
> We need still more discussion.
>
> But, personally,
> I feel that it is realistic to release at November.
> And it will be the End of November.
>
> Regards,
>
>
> On Wed, 10 Oct 2007 15:00:17 -0400
> Zhiyong Wu <zwu@redhat.com> wrote:
>
>   
>> Hi, akisada.
>>
>> At first, thank you very much for your reply last time.
>>
>> As discribed in your last reply, major revision up will be done at 
>> November or May.
>>
>> If your major revision would be released at May, how should we process 
>> this case when we are eager to have an IPv6ready Certification before it?
>>
>> How is the possibility that you will release the major revision at November?
>>
>> Need you any necessary help from us in order to promote that the major 
>> revision will be earlier released?
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Zhiyong Wu.
>>
>>
>> Yukiyo Akisada wrote:
>>     
>>> Hi, Zhiyong.
>>>
>>> IPv6 Ready Logo Program has already started preparation to support RH0 issue.
>>> Please wait the next major revision up of Program itself.
>>>
>>> By the definition of IPv6 Ready Logo Program,
>>> major revision up is done at November or May.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sat, 29 Sep 2007 16:17:27 -0400
>>> Zhiyong Wu <zwu@redhat.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>   
>>>       
>>>> Tahi users and developers,
>>>>
>>>>    As well-known,when the type of IPv6 routing header is set to IPV6_RTHDR_YPE_0, 
>>>>
>>>> it would allow remote attackers to cause a denial of service via
>>>>
>>>> crafted IPv6 type 0 route headers that create network
>>>>
>>>> amplification between two routers.
>>>>
>>>>    In the current time,the solution which is adopted by many products 
>>>>
>>>> wil cause IPv6 type 0 routing headers to be ignored. But the test scripts
>>>>
>>>> from www.tahi.org dont ignored IPv6 type 0 headers. 
>>>>
>>>>    So when we are having a IPv6ready Certification,some tests about 
>>>>
>>>> IPv6 type 0 routing header will fail if Self_Test from www.tahi.org 
>>>>
>>>> isn't modified.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>    how should we process this case when we are ready to have a IPv6ready 
>>>>
>>>> Certification?
>>>>
>>>>    please refer to 
>>>>
>>>>    (1) http://security.freebsd.org/advisories/FreeBSD-SA-07:03.ipv6.asc
>>>>
>>>>    (2) http://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2007-2242
>>>>
>>>>    (3) http://www.secdev.org/conf/IPv6_RH_security-csw07.pdf
>>>>    
>>>>
>>>>    Regards,
>>>>
>>>>    Zhiyong Wu
>>>>    
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>     
>>>>         
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> Yukiyo Akisada <akisada@tahi.org>
>>>   
>>>       
>>     
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Yukiyo Akisada <akisada@tahi.org>
>