On Tue, Apr 17, 2001 at 05:58:22AM +1000, Darren Reed wrote: > In some mail from Kris Kennaway, sie said: > > > > Surely that can't work since the purpose of that field is for received > > packet ordering (unless I'm wrong, I'm not an IPv4 guru and only > > skimmed the RFC), and what's ordered in network order isn't ordered in > > host order. > > It is not used by the receiver for packet ordering, only for collection > of fragments (of a larger packet). Okay, I'll have to read the RFC again more closely. Kris
- Re: non-random IP IDs Darren Reed
- Re: non-random IP IDs Kris Kennaway
- Re: non-random IP IDs Kris Kennaway
- Re: non-random IP IDs E.B. Dreger
- Re: non-random IP IDs Barney Wolff
- Re: non-random IP IDs Kris Kennaway
- Re: non-random IP IDs Barney Wolff
- Re: non-random IP IDs Crist Clark
- Re: non-random IP IDs Garrett Wollman
- Re: non-random IP IDs Darren Reed
- Re: non-random IP IDs Kris Kennaway
- Re: non-random IP IDs Darren Reed
- Re: non-random IP IDs Kris Kennaway
- Re: non-random IP IDs Niels Provos
- Re: non-random IP IDs Matt Dillon
- Re: non-random IP IDs Julian Elischer
- Re: non-random IP IDs Mike Silbersack
- Re: non-random IP IDs Kris Kennaway
- Re: non-random IP IDs Kris Kennaway
- Re: non-random IP IDs Darren Reed
- Re: non-random IP IDs Alfred Perlstein