From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Feb 27 20:38:14 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from mx2.freebsd.org (mx2.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::35]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A6E79106566C; Sun, 27 Feb 2011 20:38:14 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from dougb@FreeBSD.org) Received: from doug-optiplex.ka9q.net (hub.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::36]) by mx2.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6ECC814E37F; Sun, 27 Feb 2011 20:38:14 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <4D6AB636.3030708@FreeBSD.org> Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2011 12:38:14 -0800 From: Doug Barton Organization: http://SupersetSolutions.com/ User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD amd64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.13) Gecko/20110129 Thunderbird/3.1.7 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Fernando Gont References: <4D411CC6.1090202@gont.com.ar> <4D431258.8040704@FreeBSD.org> <4D437B13.1070405@FreeBSD.org> <4D518FB3.3040503@FreeBSD.org> <4D6AB2BD.50208@gont.com.ar> In-Reply-To: <4D6AB2BD.50208@gont.com.ar> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.1.2 OpenPGP: id=1A1ABC84 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: FreeBSD Net , Ivo Vachkov , bz@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Proposed patch for Port Randomization modifications according to RFC6056 X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2011 20:38:14 -0000 On 02/27/2011 12:23, Fernando Gont wrote: > On 08/02/2011 03:47 p.m., Doug Barton wrote: > > [catching up with e-mail] > >> I've been up and running on this patch vs. r218391 for over 24 hours >> now, using algorithm 4 (as someone said is now the default in Linux) >> without any problems. >> >> I think Bjoern is better qualified than I to comment on the style of the >> patch, but it applies cleanly, and seems to run fine on both v4 and v6. > > Has this been commited to the tree, already? -- If so, what's the > default algorithm? Bjoern was planning to do it, I'm going to do it if he doesn't get around to it. As for default algorithm, is there any reason not to make it 4? Doug -- Nothin' ever doesn't change, but nothin' changes much. -- OK Go Breadth of IT experience, and depth of knowledge in the DNS. Yours for the right price. :) http://SupersetSolutions.com/