Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2002 15:11:18 +0200 From: Ari Suutari <ari.suutari@syncrontech.com> To: Ruslan Ermilov <ru@FreeBSD.ORG>, Luigi Rizzo <rizzo@icir.org> Cc: chkno@dork.com, freebsd-ipfw@FreeBSD.ORG, Brian Somers <brian@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: ip_dummynet.c:"*** OUCH! pipe should have been idle!" Message-ID: <200201151302.g0FD2dw92151@guinness.syncrontech.com> In-Reply-To: <20020115144045.J46269@sunbay.com> References: <20020114141539.A70340@iguana.icir.org> <20020115021839.A74391@iguana.icir.org> <20020115144045.J46269@sunbay.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi, > > Also CC:ed to Brian Somers (who committed that change) and > Ari Suutari who originally wrote natd(8). > > > Cheers, > Ruslan (who now wonders if the problem fixed in natd.c,v 1.2 was false). > If I remember correctly I was just wondering about getting an ENOBUFS error when the internet link was a slow one (because packets could be arriving from local ethernet much faster then a modem link can serve). Maybe I did think that waiting with select would be better than just drop the packet. Thinking it again it seems that dropping is not a bad thing since it would occur also if there were no natd running in similar situation. The correct fix would have been to silently drop the packet. But we have it corrected now :-) Ari S. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ipfw" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200201151302.g0FD2dw92151>