DMCA
Friends or Rivals: Insight from Integrating HIP and i3 (2004)
| Venue: | In Workshop on HIP and Related Architectures |
| Citations: | 2 - 0 self |
BibTeX
@INPROCEEDINGS{Gurtov04friendsor,
author = {Andrei Gurtov and Anthony D. Joseph},
title = {Friends or Rivals: Insight from Integrating HIP and i3},
booktitle = {In Workshop on HIP and Related Architectures},
year = {2004},
pages = {3}
}
Share
 |
 |
 |
 |
||
OpenURL
Abstract
The Host Identity Protocol (HIP) uses cryptographic host identities to provide secure and efficient end-to-end communication without requiring a distributed key authority. However, HIP hosts can be vulnerable to DoS attacks and require some infrastructure to support simultaneous mobility of end points. The Internet Indirection Infrastructure (i3) overlay network can be used to provide these desirable properties for HIP control packets. However, with the introduction of network shortcuts in i3 where two hosts can communicate directly, a question arises as to whether i3 can completely replace HIP. Is the end-to-end security provided by HIP a strong enough benefit compared to using shortcuts in i3? Is it worthwhile to consider using a general Distributed Object Location and Routing (DOLR) or Distributed Hash Table (DHT), such as Tapestry or Chord, instead of i3 as a control plane for HIP? We discuss these questions in the paper. We also present implementation experiences with HIP-i3 integration and show initial performance results comparing the throughput of i3 and HIP. 1
Keyphrases
general distributed object location hash table hip control packet initial performance result do attack key authority overlay network host identity protocol control plane desirable property end point present implementation experience simultaneous mobility hip-i3 integration network shortcut cryptographic host identity end-to-end security efficient end-to-end communication internet indirection infrastructure
