[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH,RFC] explicit connection confirmation

To: Lennert Buytenhek <buytenh@xxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [PATCH,RFC] explicit connection confirmation
From: bert hubert <ahu@xxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 7 Nov 2002 12:27:33 +0100
Cc: netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20021107093207.GA30666@xxxxxxx>
Mail-followup-to: bert hubert <ahu@xxxxxxx>, Lennert Buytenhek <buytenh@xxxxxxx>, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx
References: <20021107093207.GA30666@xxxxxxx>
Sender: netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mutt/1.3.28i
On Thu, Nov 07, 2002 at 04:32:08AM -0500, Lennert Buytenhek wrote:

> - Sockets returned from accept() on this socket after this will be
>   sockets in the SYN_RECV state instead of the ESTABLISHED state
>   (unless syncookies had to be used).  By writing to the socket,
>   you cause a SYN-ACK to be sent, and by immediately closing the
>   socket you cause a RST to be sent.

And reading, like a webserver would do? I think this approach smells, btw -
doesn't this mean that processes will now be woken up on receiving a SYN
instead of after completion of the handshake?

Would make a synflood all the more interesting..



--          Versatile DNS Software & Services           Linux Advanced Routing & Traffic Control HOWTO

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>