[Ndn-interest] NDN protocol principles: no privacy?

GTS gts at ics.uci.edu
Tue Mar 15 12:09:00 PDT 2016

Sorry, I'm a bit slow to reply:

1) True, PITs are not mandatory, but some form of router state is. (In 
order to avoid source addresses
in interests).

2) Encrypted source addresses in interests are fine (I wasn't excluding 
them in my statement).
However, who will decrypt them? Routers? Producers? Using what crypto? 
If public key, we'd have
an excellent new means of DoS... If symmetric, how are keys 

3) I believe that router caching enables not having destination 
addresses in interests.
But, I'm not even sure what a "destination address" is, broadly speaking.
An interest reflects a content name, for which the corresponding content 
might at the producer
(or not yet cached along any sensible path between consumer and 
producer). In that case,
a content name is equivalent to a destination address. Otherwise, if the 
content is already cached
along some consumer-producer path, we can view the content name (say, 
XYZ) in the interest as a
destination address of an *anycast* group XYZ, where a node is a group 
member if it caches XYZ.
So, either way, it's a destination address.


p.s. In case it isn't obvious, (3) is a tongue-in-cheek comment.

Gene Tsudik
Chancellor's Professor of Computer Science
University of California, Irvine

On 3/14/16 10:52 AM, Ignacio.Solis at parc.com wrote:
> ..... 

> We don’t specifically need the current structure of PITs, we need some 
> state at the routers to avoid source addresses in interests. Also, to 
> go even further, even if we had to put source addresses in [some] 
> interests, that doesn’t mean that they have to be in the clear. I’m 
> also not sure how to follow that caching specifically is what allows 
> us to avoid destination addresses. Nacho 

More information about the Ndn-interest mailing list