[rbridge] TTL only - was RE: New fields in shim header?

[Silvano Gai]

Joe,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Joe Touch [mailto:touch at ISI.EDU]
> Sent: Monday, October 16, 2006 4:49 PM
> To: Silvano Gai
> Cc: Caitlin Bestler; Gray, Eric; rbridge at postel.org; Radia Perlman
> Subject: Re: [rbridge] TTL only - was RE: New fields in shim header?
> 
> 
> 
> Silvano Gai wrote:
> > Joe,
> >
> > .....
> >
> >> The enclosed source MAC indicates the source rbridge at the time it
> > was
> >> encapsulated;
> >
> > Not true if the source MAC was spoofed by a host connected to
another
> > RBridge. Do you agree?
> 
> True for all spoofing of MACs. That's not addressed by rbridges at
all.
> 
> >> the appropriate source rbridge for that packet may change
> >> by the time the packet arrives elsewhere in the rbridge campus.
> >
> > If you put the source RBridge address in the frame, why should it
> > change?
> 
> What might change is what the subsequent hops thinks the source
_should_
> be. The address in the packet wouldn't change, but would be useless in
> that case.
> 

It will tell me with certainty where the frame entered the RBridge
network (which RBridge did the encapsulation), which for me is
important, not useless.

-- Silvano