Date: Thu, 6 May 2004 17:59:36 -0500 From: "David W. Chapman Jr." <dwcjr@inethouston.net> To: "Maxim Konovalov" <maxim@macomnet.ru> Cc: Andre Oppermann <andre@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Default behaviour of IP Options processing Message-ID: <04f001c433bd$cdc100f0$fd01a8c0@dwcjr> References: <200405061846.i46Ik3Jc060969@repoman.freebsd.org> <409A8EF3.5825EF0C@freebsd.org> <20040507020422.D94207@mp3files.int.ru> <20040506223545.GA61873@minubian.inethouston.net> <20040507023844.B96754@mp3files.int.ru>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> You mean ip options not tcp, right? I do not understant why we > invent a new mechanism if we already have one. Put an example in > /etc/rc.firewall. Yes, I stand corrected, ip option it is :) > You mean "more obscure", right? Where net.inet.ip.process_options > documented? How does it operate with f.e. IPSTEALTH? I definitely agree it should be documented, but that's just a minor detail which can be easily taken care of.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?04f001c433bd$cdc100f0$fd01a8c0>