Date: Mon, 04 Sep 2000 10:17:41 +1100 From: Peter Jeremy <peter.jeremy@alcatel.com.au> To: Nate Williams <nate@yogotech.com> Cc: freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: ipfw and fragments Message-ID: <00Sep4.101727est.115345@border.alcanet.com.au> In-Reply-To: <200009031727.LAA03881@nomad.yogotech.com>; from nate@yogotech.com on Sun, Sep 03, 2000 at 11:27:46AM -0600 References: <0009030256211M.20066@smp.kyx.net> <Pine.NEB.3.96L.1000903094614.69440A-100000@fledge.watson.org> <200009031727.LAA03881@nomad.yogotech.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 2000-Sep-03 11:27:46 -0600, Nate Williams <nate@yogotech.com> wrote: >Actually, isn't the purpose of PMTU to avoid the need to fragment the >packet at intermediate routers? Yes. But I have also used a RAS that just clears the DF bit and fragments the packet anyway. The RAS provider seems unable to understand that this is a problem. Peter To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-security" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?00Sep4.101727est.115345>