Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2011 18:27:31 -0800 From: Doug Barton <dougb@FreeBSD.org> To: Ivo Vachkov <ivo.vachkov@gmail.com> Cc: FreeBSD Net <freebsd-net@freebsd.org>, bz@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Proposed patch for Port Randomization modifications according to RFC6056 Message-ID: <4D437B13.1070405@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <AANLkTimhZ_pxTGt958AX8m=%2BS=g2hqsst=GH1a99D0g1@mail.gmail.com> References: <AANLkTi=rF%2BCYiNG7PurPtrwn-AMT9cYEe90epGAJDwDq@mail.gmail.com> <4D411CC6.1090202@gont.com.ar> <AANLkTinvg5tft8xockuuV9g5QYd36ko9qO4YCvy5bkJ1@mail.gmail.com> <4D431258.8040704@FreeBSD.org> <AANLkTimhZ_pxTGt958AX8m=%2BS=g2hqsst=GH1a99D0g1@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 01/28/2011 11:57, Ivo Vachkov wrote: > On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 9:00 PM, Doug Barton<dougb@freebsd.org> wrote: >> How does net.inet.ip.portrange.randomalg sound? I would also suggest that >> the second sysctl be named net.inet.ip.portrange.randomalg.alg5_tradeoff so >> that one could do 'sysctl net.inet.ip.portrange.randomalg' and see both >> values. But I won't quibble on that. :) >> > > I have no objections with this. Since this is my first attempt to > contribute something back to the community I decided to see how it's > done before. So I found: > net.inet.tcp.rfc1323 > net.inet.tcp.rfc3465 > net.inet.tcp.rfc3390 > net.inet.tcp.rfc3042 > which probably led me in a wrong direction :) Yeah, I had actually intended to say something to the effect of "there are plenty of unfortunate examples in the tree already so your doing it that way is totally understandable" but I trimmed it. > I understand your point and agree with it. However, my somewhat > limited understanding of the sysctl internal organization is telling > me that tree node does not support values. Am I wrong? You are likely correct. :) It's an inconvenient fact that often forget because that's not the sandbox that I usually play in. > If my reasoning > is correct, maybe I can create the sysctl variables with the following > names: > - net.inet.ip.portrange.randomalg (Tree Node) > - net.inet.ip.portrange.randomalg.alg[orithm] (Leaf Node, to store the > selected algorithm) I would go with "version" to increase the visual distinctiveness. I searched the current tree and there doesn't seem to be a clear winner for how to portray "this is the current N/M that is in use" but "version" seems to have the most representatives. > - net.inet.ip.portrange.randomalg.alg5_tradeoff (Leaf Node, to store > the Algorithm 5 trade-off value) I'm assuming this is the "N" value mentioned in the RFC. If so, I commend you on your choice of "tradeoff" to represent it. :) hth, Doug -- Nothin' ever doesn't change, but nothin' changes much. -- OK Go Breadth of IT experience, and depth of knowledge in the DNS. Yours for the right price. :) http://SupersetSolutions.com/
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4D437B13.1070405>