logging: Use lg_exitstatus

[secnet.git] / NOTES

diff --git a/NOTES b/NOTES
index 7ead923be70060d708e287b24d63a7dc2093e39a..f5ebc652045e20818d83188fd6f919e8deb11b53 100644 (file)
--- a/NOTES
+++ b/NOTES
@@ -198,6 +198,8 @@ The optional additional data after the sender's name consists of some
 initial subset of the following list of items:
  * A 32-bit integer with a set of capability flags, representing the
    abilities of the sender.
 initial subset of the following list of items:
  * A 32-bit integer with a set of capability flags, representing the
    abilities of the sender.

+ * In MSG3/MSG4: a 16-bit integer being the sender's MTU, or zero.
+   (In other messages: nothing.)  See below.

  * More data which is yet to be defined and which must be ignored
    by receivers.
 The optional additional data after the receiver's name is not
  * More data which is yet to be defined and which must be ignored
    by receivers.
 The optional additional data after the receiver's name is not


@@ -220,6 +222,45 @@ No capability flags are currently defined.  Unknown capability flags
 should be treated as late ones.
 
 
 should be treated as late ones.
 
 

+MTU handling
+
+In older versions of secnet, secnet was not capable of fragmentation
+or sending ICMP Frag Needed.  Administrators were expected to configure
+consistent MTUs across the network.
+
+It is still the case in the current version that the MTUs need to be
+configured reasonably coherently across the network: the allocated
+buffer sizes must be sufficient to cope with packets from all other
+peers.
+
+However, provided the buffers are sufficient, all packets will be
+processed properly: a secnet receiving a packet larger than the
+applicable MTU for its delivery will either fragment it, or reject it
+with ICMP Frag Needed.
+
+The MTU additional data field allows secnet to advertise an MTU to the
+peer.  This allows the sending end to handle overlarge packets, before
+they are transmitted across the underlying public network.  This can
+therefore be used to work around underlying network braindamage
+affecting large packets.
+
+If the MTU additional data field is zero or not present, then the peer
+should use locally-configured MTU information (normally, its local
+netlink MTU) instead.
+
+If it is nonzero, the peer may send packets up to the advertised size
+(and if that size is bigger than the peer's administratively
+configured size, the advertiser promises that its buffers can handle
+such a large packet).
+
+A secnet instance should not assume that just because it has
+advertised an mtu which is lower than usual for the vpn, the peer will
+honour it, unless the administrator knows that the peers are
+sufficiently modern to understand the mtu advertisement option.  So
+secnet will still accept packets which exceed the link MTU (whether
+negotiated or assumed).
+
+

 Messages:
 
 1) A->B: *,iA,msg1,A+,B+,nA
 Messages:
 
 1) A->B: *,iA,msg1,A+,B+,nA


@@ -291,3 +332,37 @@ vaguely recent version of secnet.  (In fact, there is no evidence in
 the git history of it ever being sent.)
 
 This message number is reserved.
 the git history of it ever being sent.)
 
 This message number is reserved.

+
+11) *,*,PROD,A,B
+
+Sent in response to a NAK from B to A.  Requests that B initiates a
+key exchange with A, if B is willing and lacks a transport key for A.
+(If B doesn't have A's address configured, implicitly supplies A's
+public address.)
+
+This is necessary because if one end of a link (B) is restarted while
+a key exchange is in progress, the following bad state can persist:
+the non-restarted end (A) thinks that the key is still valid and keeps
+sending packets, but B either doesn't realise that a key exchange with
+A is necessary or (if A is a mobile site) doesn't know A's public IP
+address.
+
+Normally in these circumstances B would send NAKs to A, causing A to
+initiate a key exchange.  However if A and B were already in the
+middle of a key exchange then A will not want to try another one until
+the first one has timed out ("setup-time" x "setup-retries") and then
+the key exchange retry timeout ("wait-time") has elapsed.
+
+However if B's setup has timed out, B would be willing to participate
+in a key exchange initiated by A, if A could be induced to do so.
+This is the purpose of the PROD packet.
+
+We send no more PRODs than we would want to send data packets, to
+avoid a traffic amplification attack.  We also send them only in state
+WAIT, as in other states we wouldn't respond favourably.  And we only
+honour them if we don't already have a key.
+
+With PROD, the period of broken communication due to a key exchange
+interrupted by a restart is limited to the key exchange total
+retransmission timeout, rather than also including the key exchange
+retry timeout.