Security Basics mailing list archives

Re: PortFast Question


From: Maarten Claes <maarten.claes () gmail com>
Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2004 11:56:54 +0200

This is indeed what portfast does. For example, when trying to boot
off a PXE enabled NIC, the switch port hasnt yet come online due to
the learning phase of STP. Result is that the PXE program's timer
times out. Portfast solves this issue.

Maarten.


On Tue, 28 Sep 2004 09:44:29 -0500, jgrimshaw () asap com
<jgrimshaw () asap com> wrote:
I don't think that's what Port Fast is.

My impression of PortFast was to reduce the time that the Spanning Tree
Protocol (STP) takes to bring a specific port online.  One would utilize
portfast for ports that have only hosts attached them (that is,
destinations)--not switches and hubs.  PortFast significantly reduces the
delay of STP by not going through listening and learning steps--it goes
straight to forwarding.  The concept is that there is no reason to
determine if a port block is required, because the port has been
statically configured to expect a host to be connected to it.  Thus the
name Port Fast--it has nothing to do with the speed of the port, it has to
do with the speed of the port coming online--it can reduce the time from
45 seconds to 15 seconds or less.

Port speed negotiation would occur before the STP process began.  Speed
negotiation is taking place at layer 1, while the STP (and port fast) kick
in at layer 2.  It will be dynamic unless the hardware is set otherwise,
and both ends need to be set the same way--dynamic or at a specific speed
and duplex.

Personally, I prefer to use statically defined speeds and duplexes for
infrastructure equipment, and let the end user PCs sort it out for
themselves dynamically.  While  there may be some issues with an auto
setting, most users wouldn't notice the difference.

LordInfidel () directionweb com
09/27/2004 09:16 AM

To
'Josh Sukol' <secnews () gmail com>, security-basics () securityfocus com
cc

Subject
RE: PortFast Question




If I had to guess.....  the proprietary hardware box is having a hard time
using auto-negotiation.

Here's what happens when you connect a device to a switch/hub, and both
sides are set to auto-negotiate.

The connecting device will try to connect at it's maximum speed and
duplex.
If the other side(in this case the switch) can understand the connecting
device and hence agree at the speed and duplex, the connection is made. If
it can not understand the connecting device, it says Hey I can't
understand
that connection request, try another...

And they both go back and forth until a connection is made.  Now there are
times when a connection, "appears" to be made but you can not ping or it
seems like the connection is really slow.  That is because there are
transmission errors due to the way each connection is expecting to receive
the data.

Now with portfast, you are removing auto-negotiation from the switch and
you
are telling the switch port "Do not attempt to auto-negotiate, assume the
port is 100/Full and bring the port up as such".

As far as protecting that port, you can lock that port down to the MAC
address of the connecting device.

Typically, for any static network device that you are using, (servers,
routers, firewalls, etc), the network adapter on the device should be
manually set for speed/duplex.  Never leave it set to auto.

-----Original Message-----
From: Josh Sukol [mailto:secnews () gmail com]
Sent: Friday, September 24, 2004 10:05 AM
To: security-basics () securityfocus com
Subject: PortFast Question

I am running a small network using four Cisco Catalyst 2950 switches.
I am in the process of configuring a new software package that uses
some proprietary hardware that connects to the  network via Ethernet.
When plugged into the network the device would connect for a minute or
two and than connectivity would drop (i.e. ping would fail, and the
light on the switch would turn from green to amber)  This pattern
continued for as long as the device was plugged into the network.  The
cabling was checked and tested with other equipment and there were no
other problems.

After trying several other things I eventually started changing the
ethernet port settings on the switch itself and found that by enabling
portfast the device functioned fine.  I have found very little
information about port fast security issues.  I was able to find and
did read up on PortFast BPDU guard and potential DoS using malformed
packets.  Are there any other security issues that effect me enabling
Portfast on specific ports that connect back to a single device?  Are
there any other ways to solve this problem that might allow me to
sidestep this potential security issues all together?

- Slightly Off Topic -
If anyone knows why this behavior occurs and why enabling portfast
fixes the connectivity issue I would be very interested to a hear an
explanation.

Thanks in advance for the wisdom!

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Computer Forensics Training at the InfoSec Institute. All of our class
sizes
are guaranteed to be 12 students or less to facilitate one-on-one
interaction with one of our expert instructors. Gain the in-demand skills
of
a certified computer examiner, learn to recover trace data left behind by
fraud, theft, and cybercrime perpetrators. Discover the source of computer
crime and abuse so that it never happens again.

http://www.infosecinstitute.com/courses/computer_forensics_training.html
----------------------------------------------------------------------------





-- 
Maarten Claes
-------------------------------------------
Flying is easy; just throw yourself at the ground and miss


Current thread: