Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 13:03:46 -0500 (EST) From: Garrett Wollman <wollman@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu> To: "Tim J. Robbins" <tim@robbins.dropbear.id.au> Cc: freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: options TCP_DROP_SYNFIN Message-ID: <200112171803.fBHI3kA35513@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu> In-Reply-To: <20011217185456.A34365@raven.robbins.dropbear.id.au> References: <20011217073102.GA94480@noname> <20011217185456.A34365@raven.robbins.dropbear.id.au>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
<<On Mon, 17 Dec 2001 18:54:56 +1100, "Tim J. Robbins" <tim@robbins.dropbear.id.au> said: > T/TCP (RFC 1644) speeds up transactions by not using the standard three- > way handshake. I gather that it's more efficient if you have lots of > quick connects and disconnects as you do with HTTP when not using the > keepalive features. However, it's almost entirely irrelevant to this discussion, since the only Web client which ever used T/TCP was FreeBSD 3.0's `fetch' program. Transaction TCP turned out to be a bad idea, for a few fundamental reasons, but might make a comeback some day in a world with stronger security for TCP connections (e.g., host identity payload). DES and I have discussed a more appropriate behavior for this option which does not violate the TCP standard. -GAWollman To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-security" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200112171803.fBHI3kA35513>