Subject: Re: traceroute as a flooder (fwd)
To: Curt Sampson <email@example.com>
From: Michael Graff <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 02/16/1999 19:57:50
Curt Sampson <email@example.com> writes:
> Certainly we can't leave things as they are, however. Nor can we
> allow random users to generate return addresses of 127.0.0.1. I
> suppose we could allow loopback interface addresses, but disallow
> 127.* addresses. But I'm not terribly keen on that, because it's
> more work (for me to write :-)) and because I'm not convinced all
> other loopback interface addresses would be valid.
This is a moot point, I believe.
Clearly 127.* isn't a wire address, but any other address should be
ok, since I could just bind() to it and send UDP packets myself.
If I can do that as a user, what's the harm in allowing me to tell
traceroute to use it?