From owner-freebsd-bugs  Wed Oct  1 19:27:17 1997
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-bugs>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id TAA24957
          for bugs-outgoing; Wed, 1 Oct 1997 19:27:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from implode.root.com (implode.root.com [198.145.90.17])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA24951
          for <bugs@FreeBSD.ORG>; Wed, 1 Oct 1997 19:27:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from implode.root.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by implode.root.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id TAA16000;
	Wed, 1 Oct 1997 19:29:45 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <199710020229.TAA16000@implode.root.com>
To: Don Lewis <Don.Lewis@tsc.tdk.com>
cc: bugs@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: Re: FreeBSD TCP stack and RST processing [subj changed] 
In-reply-to: Your message of "Wed, 01 Oct 1997 18:37:36 PDT."
             <199710020137.SAA16461@salsa.gv.tsc.tdk.com> 
From: David Greenman <dg@root.com>
Reply-To: dg@root.com
Date: Wed, 01 Oct 1997 19:29:45 -0700
Sender: owner-freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.ORG
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

>} Its ok to look for
>} an ACK when in SYN_SENT on RST's coz thats what is expected, and if you
>} get other than expected and drop then its no big deal unless you can force
>} a remote freebsd system to send out (pure) SYN's to non-connected
>} ports, unlikely.  I  only have the snippets posted to the list available, but 
>} based on them I'd say remove the case SYN_RECEIVED that was added.
>
>That's what I did in my local source tree.

   ...and that's the way -current is as of a few minutes ago. I'll merge the
fix into 2.2-stable in a day or two.

-DG

David Greenman
Core-team/Principal Architect, The FreeBSD Project