Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 01 Oct 1997 22:36:19 -0700
From:      "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@time.cdrom.com>
To:        Terry Lambert <tlambert@primenet.com>
Cc:        pst@juniper.net, dg@root.com, Don.Lewis@tsc.tdk.com, richard@a42.deep-thought.org, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG, bugs@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: FreeBSD TCP stack and RST processing [subj changed] 
Message-ID:  <4592.875770579@time.cdrom.com>
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 02 Oct 1997 01:19:37 -0000." <199710020119.SAA02029@usr04.primenet.com> 

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > Well, since it certainly seems to cause deviation from expected
> > behavior and none of the other *BSDs have picked it up, shall we
> > simply rip it out?
> 
> I think the "ignore H_ACK for the compare" suggestion is best.  If we
> ripped out everything that the other BSD's didn't agree was BSD, then
> you'd lose things like, oh, the new VM code.  And so on.  Not a strong
> justifiable argument, IMO.

No, but it's also not my argument.  I merely cited it as a data point,
any comparison between the VM system and a relatively syn-flood fix
being definite apples-and-oranges material anyway.  The other *BSDs
generally do track one another's DoS and general security fixes unless
there's a clear reason to avoid something.  The VM system is not in
this category, it's merely too hard to track in a multi-architecture
environment (not for want of trying on the part of various folks in
NetBSD, at least).

					Jordan



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4592.875770579>