From owner-freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Mar 30 20:30:16 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-bugs@hub.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 55A9D16A4CE for ; Wed, 30 Mar 2005 20:30:16 +0000 (GMT) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [216.136.204.21]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3C09643D39 for ; Wed, 30 Mar 2005 20:30:16 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from gnats@FreeBSD.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (gnats@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.13.3/8.13.3) with ESMTP id j2UKUGcR022116 for ; Wed, 30 Mar 2005 20:30:16 GMT (envelope-from gnats@freefall.freebsd.org) Received: (from gnats@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.13.3/8.13.1/Submit) id j2UKUGu8022114; Wed, 30 Mar 2005 20:30:16 GMT (envelope-from gnats) Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 20:30:16 GMT Message-Id: <200503302030.j2UKUGu8022114@freefall.freebsd.org> To: freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.org From: Mike Silbersack Subject: Re: kern/79342: When looking for an unused port number for bind or connect, if low & high port range are equal, kernel can trap in divide by zero error X-BeenThere: freebsd-bugs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list Reply-To: Mike Silbersack List-Id: Bug reports List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 20:30:16 -0000 The following reply was made to PR kern/79342; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Mike Silbersack To: Maxim Konovalov Cc: Anjali Kulkarni , bug-followup@freebsd.org Subject: Re: kern/79342: When looking for an unused port number for bind or connect, if low & high port range are equal, kernel can trap in divide by zero error Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 14:28:15 -0600 (CST) On Wed, 30 Mar 2005, Maxim Konovalov wrote: > It's not perfect because it should turn random port allocation off if > the diapason of ports is small but I am not sure yet we need an > additional sysctl for that. Mike, what is your opinion? If the port range is very small, turning random port allocation off makes sense. Since we'll have to do a patch either way, we might as well make that change. Mike "Silby" Silbersack