On Wed, 31 Mar 2004, Andre Oppermann wrote:
> We have the following sysctl's to withstand such an attack:
>
> net.inet.ip.maxfragpackets [800]
> net.inet.ip.maxfragsperpacket [16]
>
> Which limits such an attack to 800 packets overall and 16 fragments
> per packet.
>
> Of course, when the maxfr
We have the following sysctl's to withstand such an attack:
net.inet.ip.maxfragpackets [800]
net.inet.ip.maxfragsperpacket [16]
Which limits such an attack to 800 packets overall and 16 fragments
per packet.
Of course, when the maxfragpackets limit is reached by malicous
packets we are unable
- Forwarded message from [EMAIL PROTECTED] -
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2004 22:18:05 -0600
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: IPv4 fragmentation --> The Rose Attack
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Greetings and Salutations:
While this discussion pertains to IPv4, IPv6 also a
Hello,
I try to do this:
route add 163.117.139.99/32 -iface tap0
route change 163.117.139.99/32 -link 00:bd:82:1c:96:00
And when I see the result with "netstat -rn", I get this:
[snipped]
163.117.140.30/32 00:bd.82.1c.96.0 ULS 0 14 tap0
^^^
Hi,
it looks everything is ok, until your routes were added. Could you try
this without these routes?
On Mon, 29 Mar 2004, Jay Hall wrote:
> Mar 29 06:37:37 ST_CHARLES mpd: [vpn] IPCP: Up event
> Mar 29 06:37:37 ST_CHARLES mpd: [vpn] IPCP: state change Starting -->
> Req-Sent
> Mar 29 06:37:37 ST
Hi everybody,
On my work we are evaluating the possibility of implementing the
ET/BWMGR Bandwidth Shapper.
The installation it's a little odd, and the documentation it's a piece
of shit. That software should work on bridge mode (with a custom
implementation of bridging) but on my server (an IBM x3
On Wed, Mar 31, 2004 at 12:59:14AM -0800, Luigi Rizzo wrote:
> Hi,
> i was wondering if anyone knows what kind of support we have
> in FreeBSD networking code, for non contiguous netmasks.
> While it is trivial to support them for interface addresses,
> managing them in the routing table is probabl
Hi,
i was wondering if anyone knows what kind of support we have
in FreeBSD networking code, for non contiguous netmasks.
While it is trivial to support them for interface addresses,
managing them in the routing table is probably far from trivial
and I believe also mostly useless... and anyways, i
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Wes Peters
> Sent: Tuesday, March 30, 2004 3:06 PM
> To: Steven Stremciuc; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Looking for switch recommendations ...
>
>
> Every switch that does port mirroring probabl
