| To: | Herbert Xu <herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [RFC/PATCH] "strict" ipv4 reassembly |
| From: | Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxx> |
| Date: | Wed, 18 May 2005 02:04:14 +0200 |
| Cc: | dlstevens@xxxxxxxxxx, rick.jones2@xxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <20050517232556.GA26846@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> (Herbert Xu's message of "Wed, 18 May 2005 09:25:56 +1000") |
| References: | <E1DYBED-0006wa-00@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <Pine.LNX.4.61.0505171612440.3335@xxxxxxxxxx> <20050517232556.GA26846@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Sender: | netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| User-agent: | Gnus/5.110002 (No Gnus v0.2) Emacs/21.3 (gnu/linux) |
Herbert Xu <herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > Perhaps you misunderstood what I was saying. I meant are there any > extant systems that would transmit 1 set of fragments to host A with > id x, then 65535 packets host B, and then wrap around and send a new > set of fragments to host A with idx. > > Linux will never do this thanks to inetpeer.c. It will, you just need enough other hosts to thrash inetpeer. How many you need depends on your available memory. -Andi |
| Previous by Date: | Re: [RFC/PATCH] "strict" ipv4 reassembly, Herbert Xu |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: [RFC/PATCH] "strict" ipv4 reassembly, Nivedita Singhvi |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [RFC/PATCH] "strict" ipv4 reassembly, Herbert Xu |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [RFC/PATCH] "strict" ipv4 reassembly, Herbert Xu |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |