| To: | Nivedita Singhvi <niv@xxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [RFC/PATCH] "strict" ipv4 reassembly |
| From: | Herbert Xu <herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Wed, 18 May 2005 10:10:54 +1000 |
| Cc: | Arthur Kepner <akepner@xxxxxxx>, dlstevens@xxxxxxxxxx, rick.jones2@xxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <428A871F.1000308@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| References: | <E1DYBED-0006wa-00@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <Pine.LNX.4.61.0505171612440.3335@xxxxxxxxxx> <20050517232556.GA26846@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <428A871F.1000308@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| Sender: | netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| User-agent: | Mutt/1.5.6+20040907i |
On Tue, May 17, 2005 at 05:06:55PM -0700, Nivedita Singhvi wrote: > > Mainline linux certainly has this (per-inetpeer ip_id) - but > at least one distro did not (use inetpeer) :). Not sure > what the current situation is. What was the reason for this? Perhaps we can solve their problems with inetpeer in a better way than disabling it? > Of course, if all the traffic is on the same connection > (which isn't out of the ordinary) would still come down > to the same thing... Please see my proposal elsewhere in this thread. Cheers, -- Visit Openswan at http://www.openswan.org/ Email: Herbert Xu ~{PmV>HI~} <herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/ PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt |
| Previous by Date: | Re: [RFC/PATCH] "strict" ipv4 reassembly, Herbert Xu |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: [RFC/PATCH] "strict" ipv4 reassembly, Thomas Graf |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [RFC/PATCH] "strict" ipv4 reassembly, Nivedita Singhvi |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [RFC/PATCH] "strict" ipv4 reassembly, David S. Miller |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |