Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2008 23:23:16 -0600 (CST) From: Mike Silbersack <silby@silby.com> To: Fernando Gont <fernando@gont.com.ar> Cc: Rui Paulo <rpaulo@fnop.net>, freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Ephemeral ports patch (fixed) Message-ID: <20080303231459.X43305@odysseus.silby.com> In-Reply-To: <200803031412.m23EC4WB031100@venus.xmundo.net> References: <200803030435.m234Z7As026508@venus.xmundo.net> <20080303001004.R37933@odysseus.silby.com> <200803031412.m23EC4WB031100@venus.xmundo.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 3 Mar 2008, Fernando Gont wrote: > At 04:11 a.m. 03/03/2008, Mike Silbersack wrote: > >>> Here's the same patch, but with the first ephemeral port changed from 1024 >>> to 10000. >> >> Now that I've actually gone to try to apply the patch (so I can view the >> two codepaths side by side, rather than in diff form), I'm finding that I >> can't apply it. I think all the whitespace got stomped, either by your >> mail program or my mail program. Can you please resent this as an >> attachment? > > Sure. Please let me know if this one is okay. > > Kind regards, > > -- > Fernando Gont > e-mail: fernando@gont.com.ar || fgont@acm.org > PGP Fingerprint: 7809 84F5 322E 45C7 F1C9 3945 96EE A9EF D076 FFF1 Too optimistic: ! #define IPPORT_EPHEMERALLAST 655535 Otherwise the patch looks good to me. It looked a bit strange in unified diff format, I needed to look at it in context format. (Strange, since I usually prefer unified.) Rui, were you going to get this committed? -Mike
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20080303231459.X43305>