[Int-area] Reverse Traceroute - with or without state

[Rolf Winter]

Hi,

during the last IETF meeting I presented Stateless Reverse Traceroute (https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-heiwin-intarea-reverse-traceroute-stateless) and mentioned, that I personally would leave it to the implementation to decide whether it will use state or not.

Keeping a little state has the advantage, that RTT estimations will always work (without state it will work about 50% of the times on today's internet). Also, we could implement some "advanced" operations, such as allowing to traceroute somewhere else, which would be the ICMP equivalent of https://downforeveryoneorjustme.com/.

You can find the stateful version described here:

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-heiwin-intarea-reverse-traceroute

Any thoughts on this?

Best,

Rolf

As I said, I would personally leave it to the implementation and use common state management techniques for protecting against state exhaustion attacks such as rate limiting etc. The signalling would not be affected, so we could have both alternatives in a single document.

smime.p7s
Description: Kryptografische S/MIME-Signatur

_______________________________________________
Int-area mailing list -- int-area@ietf.org
To unsubscribe send an email to int-area-le...@ietf.org