From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG  Sun Sep 24 11:18:46 2006
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG>
X-Original-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A8F7116A407
	for <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>; Sun, 24 Sep 2006 11:18:46 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from elessar@bsdforen.de)
Received: from fix.bsdforen.de (bsdforen.de [212.204.60.79])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2AF3A43D46
	for <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>; Sun, 24 Sep 2006 11:18:45 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from elessar@bsdforen.de)
Received: by fix.bsdforen.de (Postfix, from userid 20000)
	id 90E4544A467; Sun, 24 Sep 2006 13:18:44 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.2])
	by fix.bsdforen.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A82644A433;
	Sun, 24 Sep 2006 13:18:42 +0200 (CEST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at bsdforen.de
Received: from fix.bsdforen.de ([127.0.0.2])
	by localhost (fix.bsdforen.de [127.0.0.2]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
	with LMTP id JOd6HuVdH4Y3; Sun, 24 Sep 2006 13:18:41 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from loki.starkstrom.lan (p54A46F66.dip.t-dialin.net
	[84.164.111.102])
	(using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
	(No client certificate requested)
	by fix.bsdforen.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2515F44A40B;
	Sun, 24 Sep 2006 13:18:40 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2006 13:18:38 +0200
From: Joerg Pernfuss <elessar@bsdforen.de>
To: Anton - Valqk <valqk@lozenetz.org>
Message-ID: <20060924131838.23bb9ffc@loki.starkstrom.lan>
In-Reply-To: <451666C9.6060902@lozenetz.org>
References: <451666C9.6060902@lozenetz.org>
X-Mailer: Sylpheed-Claws 2.2.3 (GTK+ 2.8.9; i386-portbld-freebsd6.1)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-DSPAM-Result: Whitelisted
X-DSPAM-Processed: Sun Sep 24 13:18:44 2006
X-DSPAM-Confidence: 0.9988
X-DSPAM-Probability: 0.0000
X-DSPAM-Signature: 45166994563707906521308
Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: ipstealth question.
X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code <freebsd-stable.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-stable>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable>,
	<mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2006 11:18:46 -0000

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Sun, 24 Sep 2006 14:06:49 +0300
Anton - Valqk <valqk@lozenetz.org> wrote:

> Hi group,
> I was wondering is option
> 
> options         IPSTEALTH
> 
> not in the GENERIC on purpose?

Without knowing the exact number, I am sure not decrementing the
TTL violates at least one RFC. Imagine some datacenter with lots
of FreeBSD installations and IPSTEALTH part of GENERIC.
Ideally they do their routing via FreeBSD/netgraph too.

Packets won't die, especially if they have a loop somewhere.

	Joerg
- -- 
| /"\   ASCII ribbon   |  GnuPG Key ID | e86d b753 3deb e749 6c3a |
| \ / campaign against |    0xbbcaad24 | 5706 1f7d 6cfd bbca ad24 |
|  X    HTML in email  |        .the next sentence is true.       |
| / \     and news     |     .the previous sentence was a lie.    |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (FreeBSD)

iD8DBQFFFmmOH31s/bvKrSQRAoPAAJ4wod2pT6Irr8AzhF7M4LRaXJZ7TwCdGwQi
y0kNNpGp0xG96o11YxfE2a8=
=MXk6
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

!DSPAM:45166994563707906521308!