> On Nov 25, 2018, at 11:57 PM, Gert Doering <gert@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Hi, > >> On Sun, Nov 25, 2018 at 09:16:23PM -0800, Joe Touch wrote: >> I.e., most of the analysis in this document is flat out incorrect in assuming that merely because a packet could cause a router to do work that it is a security risk to handle that packet as intended. > > And then IETF wonders why operators do not feel like time spent on > providing their input to IETF WGs is well-spent. > > What else can it be, on a real-world device, in today's Internet? The failure of a device to run as advertised or the failure of an operation to select the an appropriate device. Operators that want to conserve resources without cause are welcome to run their routers inside glass boxes in museums. Routers do work. Packets cause that work. That work is not an attack unless it is *disproportionate*. That is not shown for nearly any of the cases in this document. Joe
