From owner-freebsd-net  Wed Jan 24 11:27:45 2001
Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
Received: from implode.root.com (root.com [209.102.106.178])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3BB4637B400
	for <net@FreeBSD.ORG>; Wed, 24 Jan 2001 11:27:25 -0800 (PST)
Received: from implode.root.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by implode.root.com (8.8.8/8.8.5) with ESMTP id LAA23469;
	Wed, 24 Jan 2001 11:18:50 -0800 (PST)
Message-Id: <200101241918.LAA23469@implode.root.com>
To: Luigi Rizzo <rizzo@aciri.org>
Cc: net@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: Re: dubious code in ip_output() ? 
In-reply-to: Your message of "Wed, 24 Jan 2001 10:43:20 PST."
             <200101241843.f0OIhKQ09772@iguana.aciri.org> 
From: David Greenman <dg@root.com>
Reply-To: dg@root.com
Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 11:18:50 -0800
Sender: owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org

>you are absolutely right that the code was correct at the time
>it was committed -- i think i tried to mention this.
>
>The question is where to move it now. Because it seems to be only
>necessary when we have fragmentation, perhaps the correct place is
>somewhere near the place where fragments are created (around line
>830 in 4.2):
>
>        len = (ifp->if_mtu - hlen) &~ 7;
>        if (len < 8) {
>                error = EMSGSIZE;
>                goto bad;
>        }
>---> move check here <----
>        /*
>         * if the interface will not calculate checksums on
>         * fragmented packets, then do it here.
>         */
>
>so we get as much error reports as possible -- what do you think ?

  If it works there, then that's fine by me.

-DG

David Greenman
Co-founder, The FreeBSD Project - http://www.freebsd.org
President, TeraSolutions, Inc. - http://www.terasolutions.com
Pave the road of life with opportunities.


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message