Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 09:28:21 -0800 (PST) From: Tom <tom@uniserve.com> To: Mike Smith <msmith@freebsd.org> Cc: Kip Macy <kip@lyris.com>, "Mr. K." <bsd@inbox.org>, stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: panic Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.02A.9912280926520.9441-100000@shell.uniserve.ca> In-Reply-To: <199912280630.WAA01257@mass.cdrom.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 27 Dec 1999, Mike Smith wrote: > > > I was not root when this happened, so, basically, you're saying that > > > freebsd is not meant for a production environment where untrusted users > > > have telnet access? > > > > As far as I can tell, yes. Until default per user mbuf limitations or some > > such thing is in place no amount of mbufs will prevent intentionally bad > > code from downing the machine. My understanding is that this was not a > > problem in 2.x. > > It's a fundamental problem with the BSD mbuf architecture. It's not > something that as many people were seeing with 2.2 simply because people > weren't pushing systems as hard back then. Back then? People were running the same junk back then as they are now. In fact, I still have a _lot_ of 2.2 systems around, some that are woefully overloaded, but they never panic. Tom Uniserve To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.02A.9912280926520.9441-100000>