Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2001 16:54:31 -0400 (EDT) From: Mike Silbersack <silby@silby.com> To: Jesper Skriver <jesper@FreeBSD.org> Cc: Scott Renfro <scott@renfro.org>, Barney Wolff <barney@databus.com>, <freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG>, Jonathan Lemon <jlemon@flugsvamp.com>, Bill Fenner <fenner@research.att.com>, Cory Scott <cory@crazypenguin.com> Subject: Re: Proposed change to icmp_may_rst induced ENETRESET Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.30.0108271652040.96218-100000@niwun.pair.com> In-Reply-To: <20010827150923.L55723@skriver.dk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 27 Aug 2001, Jesper Skriver wrote: > On Thu, Aug 23, 2001 at 06:23:31PM -0700, Scott Renfro wrote: > > You have a valid point that icmp_may_rst changes nmap's behavior, even > > with the proposed patch. If you want nmap's historic behavior (admin > > prohib ==> filtered), then turning off icmp_may_rst works. With > > icmp_may_rst turned on and the patch commited, you get the other > > behavior (admin prohib ==> closed). Without the patch, nmap spews > > errors and would need a FreeBSD-specific change. > > I pretty much doesn't care, Jonathan, Bill, Mike what do you think ? > > /Jesper Seems best to have icmp admin-prohibited return what a RST would, just to be compatible with the widest range of apps, IMHO. Mike "Silby" Silbersack To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" 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.4.30.0108271652040.96218-100000>