Alan Cox wrote:
On Llu, 2006-05-22 at 11:48 -0700, Rick Jones wrote:
ID of zero again? I thought that went away years ago? Anyway, given
the number of "helpful" devices out there willing to clear the DF bit,
fragment and forward, perhaps always setting the IP ID to 0, even if DF
is set, isn't such a good idea?
Any device that clears DF is so terminally broken that you've already
lost the battle the moment you bought it.
Perhaps, but still, always setting the IP datagram ID to the same value
even with the DF bit set seems contrary to the "conservative in what we
send" that is so often brought-forth as a reason a stack behaves the way
it does.
rick jones
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
