Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 7 Mar 2017 09:52:06 -0500
From:      Michael Sierchio <kudzu@tenebras.com>
To:        Ian Smith <smithi@nimnet.asn.au>
Cc:        Mark Felder <feld@freebsd.org>, "freebsd-ipfw@freebsd.org" <freebsd-ipfw@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: [Bug 216867] IPFW workstation rules block DNSSEC resulting in DNS failure on freebsd.org domains
Message-ID:  <CAHu1Y71bA4=WDwEPfWEhAwQd02AG4ksKCsZW8HCG+Ln+UrywQg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <20170308013059.I87835@sola.nimnet.asn.au>
References:  <bug-216867-7515@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> <bug-216867-7515-niEJ7KtnU7@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> <20170308013059.I87835@sola.nimnet.asn.au>

Next in thread | Previous in thread | Raw E-Mail | Index | Archive | Help
On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 9:43 AM, Ian Smith <smithi@nimnet.asn.au> wrote:

However, looking at the review patch, I do wonder if the reass shouldn't
> precede, rather than follow, the check-state?
>
>
Absolutely, yes - fragments don't carry sub-protocol info.


--=20
"Well," Brahma said, "even after ten thousand explanations, a fool is no
wiser, but an intelligent person requires only two thousand five hundred."

- The Mah=C4=81bh=C4=81rata



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <http://docs.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAHu1Y71bA4=WDwEPfWEhAwQd02AG4ksKCsZW8HCG+Ln+UrywQg>