Subject: Re: ip_flow.c
To: Charles M. Hannum <email@example.com>
From: Jason Thorpe <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 01/26/1999 23:37:13
On Tue, 26 Jan 1999 21:23:31 -0500 (EST)
"Charles M. Hannum" <email@example.com> wrote:
> 1) There's no need to check both ipforwarding and ipflow_inuse.
True 'nuff. If ipforwarding == 0, there won't be any ipflows.
> 2) There's no need to check the header checksum. In the rare case
> where it's incorrect, either: a) we will fail to find a flow and go
> through the slow path anyway, or b) it will be dropped by the
> destination host. I believe many hardware routers don't do this
Probably worth checking Router Requirements...
> 3) There's no need to check the IP packet length. Again, in the rare
> case where it's incorrect, it will be rejected on the destination
> host. Furthermore, truncating the packet may actually reduce
> efficiency (e.g. by forcing us to repad a packet to send it out an
> Ethernet interface).
If you're referring to the change made in rev 1.6, this actually fixed
a bug which I believe caused some systems to crash... Bill Sommerfeld
can probably shed more light on this.
-- Jason R. Thorpe <firstname.lastname@example.org>