Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 21 Aug 2003 14:03:21 +0400
From:      Alex Povolotsky <tarkhil@webmail.sub.ru>
To:        freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Strange fork-related problem: acutally, virus-related
Message-ID:  <20030821140321.3a8a6130.tarkhil@webmail.sub.ru>
In-Reply-To: <D2CFC58E0F8CB443B54BE72201E8916E94C9E1@dehhx005.hbg.de.int.atosorigin.com>
References:  <D2CFC58E0F8CB443B54BE72201E8916E94C9E1@dehhx005.hbg.de.int.atosorigin.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 20 Aug 2003 22:07:43 +0200
"Oldach, Helge" <Helge.Oldach@atosorigin.com> wrote:

OH> > 
OH> > Anyway, it should not behave that way.
OH> 
OH> Should it? Worms are known to be a NAT killer on dedicated routing
OH> platforms. I am
OH> facing customers every other day complaining about their Cisco
OH> router performance
OH> which usually turns out to be caused by virii. (In particular these
OH> days.)

It, speaking RFC-like, MUST NOT hang the computer. It MUST issue diagnostics like "NAT state table overflow, disabling NAT for 192.168.0.104", or just "NAT state table overflow" before hanging. I've spend about a workday fighting that problem... 

But I SHOULD ask about it in ipfilter's mailing list...

-- 
Alex.



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030821140321.3a8a6130.tarkhil>