From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Dec 9 02:21:09 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EF25516A4CE; Thu, 9 Dec 2004 02:21:09 +0000 (GMT) Received: from arginine.spc.org (arginine.spc.org [195.206.69.236]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B31F643D62; Thu, 9 Dec 2004 02:21:09 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from bms@spc.org) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by arginine.spc.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C24A96542A; Thu, 9 Dec 2004 02:21:08 +0000 (GMT) Received: from arginine.spc.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (arginine.spc.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 19620-04-5; Thu, 9 Dec 2004 02:21:08 +0000 (GMT) Received: from empiric.dek.spc.org (dhcp120.icir.org [192.150.187.120]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by arginine.spc.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2396165428; Thu, 9 Dec 2004 02:21:08 +0000 (GMT) Received: by empiric.dek.spc.org (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 605C66710; Wed, 8 Dec 2004 18:21:07 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2004 18:21:07 -0800 From: Bruce M Simpson To: Andre Oppermann Message-ID: <20041209022107.GB691@empiric.icir.org> Mail-Followup-To: Andre Oppermann , Michal Mertl , freebsd-net@freebsd.org, Robert Watson References: <41B714DA.6090505@traveller.cz> <41B71553.278B66A4@freebsd.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <41B71553.278B66A4@freebsd.org> cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org cc: Michal Mertl cc: Robert Watson Subject: Re: New ICMP limits X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 09 Dec 2004 02:21:10 -0000 On Wed, Dec 08, 2004 at 03:53:07PM +0100, Andre Oppermann wrote: > I'll take care of this but I'm busy right now. Look into it later this week. Thanks for looking into this, this is one of the items which came up on the TODO lists of three separate projects (TowardEX's, XORP's, and the Network Junta's). If you aren't able to look at it let us know so someone else can step up to the mic. Of course, the sooner we can remove ARP's special meaning from RTF_REJECT, the better - that would let us implement RTF_REJECT in the fastforwarding path without further worry. Best, BMS