Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2011 14:29:41 -0800 From: Doug Barton <dougb@FreeBSD.org> To: "Bjoern A. Zeeb" <bz@FreeBSD.org> Cc: FreeBSD Net <freebsd-net@FreeBSD.org>, Ivo Vachkov <ivo.vachkov@gmail.com> Subject: Re: Proposed patch for Port Randomization modifications according to RFC6056 Message-ID: <4D6AD055.20506@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1102272159350.6104@ai.fobar.qr> References: <AANLkTi=rF%2BCYiNG7PurPtrwn-AMT9cYEe90epGAJDwDq@mail.gmail.com> <4D411CC6.1090202@gont.com.ar> <AANLkTinvg5tft8xockuuV9g5QYd36ko9qO4YCvy5bkJ1@mail.gmail.com> <4D431258.8040704@FreeBSD.org> <AANLkTimhZ_pxTGt958AX8m=%2BS=g2hqsst=GH1a99D0g1@mail.gmail.com> <4D437B13.1070405@FreeBSD.org> <AANLkTim4=xa0rfoLgt-ao30XoZkLZ1hMYzE6LsrLNcbM@mail.gmail.com> <4D518FB3.3040503@FreeBSD.org> <4D6AB2BD.50208@gont.com.ar> <4D6AB636.3030708@FreeBSD.org> <4D6ABBB7.9060807@gont.com.ar> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1102272159350.6104@ai.fobar.qr>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 02/27/2011 14:05, Bjoern A. Zeeb wrote: > On Sun, 27 Feb 2011, Fernando Gont wrote: > > Hi, > >> On 27/02/2011 05:38 p.m., Doug Barton wrote: >> >>>> Has this been commited to the tree, already? -- If so, what's the >>>> default algorithm? >>> >>> Bjoern was planning to do it, I'm going to do it if he doesn't get >>> around to it. >>> >>> As for default algorithm, is there any reason not to make it 4? >> >> Not at all. Algorithm 4 (double-hash) is the best option, IMO. > > I am still planning to do it soon but there is another thing in the > queue touching the pcb code, which are way harder to merge on > conflicts than this, so I am waiting for that to happen first. Do you have a timeline? It's been weeks since you and I first spoke about this, and I really don't want this change to get lost in the shuffle, or worse, to be committed late in the pre-release cycle for 9.0 (which will mean it won't get adequate testing). The patch as posted applied cleanly to HEAD when I did it locally, and I can generate a clean patch from my local tree if needed. My vote is that because the port randomization patch is ready to go now, it should go in, and other work that isn't ready will have to adapt. But I'm willing to hold off for another week for a really good reason. Doug -- Nothin' ever doesn't change, but nothin' changes much. -- OK Go Breadth of IT experience, and depth of knowledge in the DNS. Yours for the right price. :) http://SupersetSolutions.com/
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4D6AD055.20506>