Re: udp source address change

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



> This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156)
> --===============1336328525==
> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1;
> 	protocol="application/pgp-signature";
> 	boundary="------------enigCADC6924BAD7521CFFC2A32E"
> 
> This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156)
> --------------enigCADC6924BAD7521CFFC2A32E
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
> 
> 
> 
> mharrima101 (sent by Nabble.com) wrote:
> > Please excuse if this post is not in the correct place - I wasn't sure
> > where to put a question such as this.
> >=20
> > We are using an HP ProCurve switch in our network as a router ( it=E2=80=
> =99s a
> > layer 3 switch ).  We are communicating with all devices on the far sid=
> e
> > of the router (HP switch) with SNMP =E2=80=93 including the far side ma=
> nagement
> > interface of the HP switch.  When the switch responds to the SNMP query=
> 
> > it uses the near side IP address as the source address in the UDP heade=
> r
> > =E2=80=93 rather than the far side IP address that the query was addres=
> sed to.
> >  Since this is not the IP that we are intending to talk to, our securit=
> y
> > policy does not allow us to accept the message. =20
> >=20
> > Is the behavior of the HP switch legal under UPD?   It seems to me as
> > though this should not be allowed.
> 
> UDP is connectionless.
> 
> =46rom a UDP point of view, it is legal for the HP switch to send a UDP
> packet with any IP address from one of its own network interfaces (as
> per RFC1122, since it is acting as a host when it sources or sinks traffi=
> c).
> 
> This may or may not be the case from SNMP's point of view, however, just
> as Sec 7.3 of RFC1035 points out a similar DNS "name server bug" (quoted
> from the RFC, as others have raised as related).
> 
> I.e., this is probably an SNMP bug, possibly an SNMP protocol violation,
> but not a UDP issue. (hint: if you have to look at the UDP payload to
> decide if it's valid, it's not a UDP issue).
> 
> Joe

	Well while not illegal it is expected that response should come
	from the address the request was sent to.  SNMP is a request /
	response application and unless otherwise specified the response
	should be coming from the address the request was being sent to.
	
	I would say the switch in question was broken.

	Mark

         4.1.3.5  UDP Multihoming

            When a UDP datagram is received, its specific-destination
            address MUST be passed up to the application layer.

            An application program MUST be able to specify the IP source
            address to be used for sending a UDP datagram or to leave it
            unspecified (in which case the networking software will
            choose an appropriate source address).  There SHOULD be a
            way to communicate the chosen source address up to the
            application layer (e.g, so that the application can later
            receive a reply datagram only from the corresponding
            interface).

            DISCUSSION:
                 A request/response application that uses UDP should use
                 a source address for the response that is the same as
                 the specific destination address of the request.  See
                 the "General Issues" section of [INTRO:1].


 
> --------------enigCADC6924BAD7521CFFC2A32E
> Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
> Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature
> Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc"
> 
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (MingW32)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
> 
> iD8DBQFD8gfAE5f5cImnZrsRAl+rAKCOXUa+35mb83cerEIiU185RGpOZwCgpB6G
> Z3Tc4vp4KFQj4P+5CBctu0M=
> =YC4M
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> 
> --------------enigCADC6924BAD7521CFFC2A32E--
> 
> 
> --===============1336328525==
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> Content-Disposition: inline
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Ietf mailing list
> Ietf@xxxxxxxx
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
> 
> --===============1336328525==--
> 
--
Mark Andrews, ISC
1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742                 INTERNET: Mark_Andrews@xxxxxxx

_______________________________________________

Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]