Subject: Re: Should loose source routing be enabled if not IPFORWARDING?
To: None <current-users@NetBSD.ORG>
From: Ronald Khoo <ronald@cpm.COM.MY>
Date: 12/14/1994 19:18:25
"Charles M. Hannum" <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> This is correct behavior, as documented by RFC1122, which states on
> page 35, under section ``126.96.36.199 Options: RFC-791 Section 3.2'',
> subsection (c) Source Route Options:
> A host MUST support originating a source route and MUST be
> able to act as the final destination of a source route.
> This imples by omission that it's legal for a host to not act as an
> intermediary for source routing.
My reading is stronger than that. Having stated explicitly the requirement
only for origin and destination, and elsewhere stating that packet
forwarding should default to OFF, it is clear that when GATEWAY is not
defined, no packets, not even LSRR packets should transit the kernel.
Me: Ronald Khoo Food: Roti Chanai Drink: Tea, weak, milky without sugar
In Malaysia: email@example.com +60 3 241 5232 Computer Protocol Malaysia
In England: firstname.lastname@example.org +44 81 349 0063 Demon Internet Services