From owner-freebsd-bugs Mon Aug 28 15:10: 7 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-bugs@freebsd.org Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.FreeBSD.org [216.136.204.21]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B82B37B423 for ; Mon, 28 Aug 2000 15:10:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from gnats@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.9.3/8.9.2) id PAA28289; Mon, 28 Aug 2000 15:10:04 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from gnats@FreeBSD.org) Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2000 15:10:04 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <200008282210.PAA28289@freefall.freebsd.org> To: freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.org Cc: From: volf@oasis.IAEhv.nl (Frank Volf) Subject: Re: kern/20877: ICMP error msg on UDP port unreachable is incorrect Reply-To: volf@oasis.IAEhv.nl (Frank Volf) Sender: owner-freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org The following reply was made to PR kern/20877; it has been noted by GNATS. From: volf@oasis.IAEhv.nl (Frank Volf) To: Sheldon Hearn Cc: Frank Volf , freebsd-gnats-submit@freebsd.org Subject: Re: kern/20877: ICMP error msg on UDP port unreachable is incorrect Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2000 23:59:50 +0200 (CEST) Sheldon Hearn wrote: > > On Sun, 27 Aug 2000 19:45:22 +0200, Frank Volf wrote: > > > I disagree with the fact that you simply close this pr as being a duplicate > > case of PR 16240. > > > > PR 16240 tries to address the generic problem, which is indeed present in > > many network implementations and may or maynot be difficult to fix. > > Do you not agree that the resolution to PR 16240 will resolve PR 20877 > as a side-effect? Yes, I agree. But the impression that I got from PR 16240 is, that the general problem is too difficult to solve and I got the feeling that it would not be solved at all.... The reason that I want this fixed are twofold: 1) OS finger printing. Because FreeBSD returns the wrong data, you can use that information to 2) I'm working on fixing a bug in IP-Filter that has to do with NAT and ICMP error messages associated with the NAT-ed connection. However, before I can fix that, I must first make sure that the host OS behaves properly :-) > I know that we're not altogether keen on applying hack-arounds for more > general problems unless the more general problems can't be resolved in > the foreseeable future. If someone is going to tackle the generic problem, that would be great. But, then you should say: hey we are working on fixing the general case so we are closing your PR.... Frank To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-bugs" in the body of the message