| To: | David Stevens <dlstevens@xxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH][IPSEC] IPsec policy can be matched by ICMP type and code |
| From: | "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Wed, 11 Aug 2004 13:30:43 -0700 |
| Cc: | nakam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx, usagi-core@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, yoshfuji@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <OF94FC19D3.2EA706DF-ON88256EED.006875F7-88256EED.006980E7@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| References: | <20040810230144.2a68914b.davem@xxxxxxxxxx> <OF94FC19D3.2EA706DF-ON88256EED.006875F7-88256EED.006980E7@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| Sender: | netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
On Wed, 11 Aug 2004 13:14:19 -0600 David Stevens <dlstevens@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > raw sockets predate VJ contributions by many years and are > typically used by protocols not in the kernel. The original "ping" > used raw sockets, as well as routing protocols like BGP and RIP > which are directly encapsulated in IP, without a separate transport > protocol. The original traceroute I believe used UDP and just set > the TTL-- I don't believe it used raw sockets at all. Don't know what > the current versions do; haven't looked in a while. "ping" does not use the hdrinclude feature. > And IPv6 does support raw sockets; it just doesn't let you > generate bad checksums and some header fields, I expect > to make it harder to write attack software. So like I said, raw without the hdrinclude feature. |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: ipw2100 wireless driver, Pavel Machek |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: select implementation not POSIX compliant?, khandelw |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [PATCH][IPSEC] IPsec policy can be matched by ICMP type and code, David Stevens |
| Next by Thread: | [PATCH] XFRM: ICMP{,v6} type/code support (Take 2) (was Re: [PATCH][IPSEC] IPsec policy can be matched by ICMP type and code), YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / 吉藤英明 |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |