Date: Fri, 23 Apr 2004 04:04:10 -0500 (CDT) From: Mike Silbersack <silby@silby.com> To: jayanth <jayanth@yahoo-inc.com> Cc: avalon@caligula.anu.edu.au Subject: Re: [Full-Disclosure] IETF Draft - Fix for TCP vulnerability (fwd) Message-ID: <20040423040235.R703@odysseus.silby.com> In-Reply-To: <20040422145857.GA75539@yahoo-inc.com> References: <20040421184539.H18583@odysseus.silby.com> <20040422145857.GA75539@yahoo-inc.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, 22 Apr 2004, jayanth wrote: > if i remember right this was done to handle the Alteons which > generate a RST segment that would fall within the window size but not the > next expected sequence no. > So they would do something crazy like rcv_nxt + rcv_win as the sequence no, > for the RST segment rather than rcv_nxt + 1. > This was part of the RFC though. > > If it is a problem we can always revert it back. > > jayanth What type of packet was causing the Alteons to emit the RST? SYN, FIN, normal data? Also, has Alteon fixed the problem or do their load balancers still exhibit the behavior? Mike "Silby" Silbersack
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040423040235.R703>