Subject: Re: kernel ip_randomid() and libc randomid(3) still "broken"
To: Charles M. Hannum <abuse@spamalicious.com>
From: Jonathan Stone <jonathan@DSG.Stanford.EDU>
List: tech-net
Date: 11/26/2003 14:06:10
In message <200311262148.55560.abuse@spamalicious.com>,
"Charles M. Hannum" write:



>When are you going to wake up to the rather obvious fact that the "guarantee" 
>has been thoroughly disproven?  It was clearly shown that *consecutive* calls 
>to ip_randomid() can return the same number.

Charles, be fair.  At this point we're all discussing the less-broken
version which repeats every 12,000 IDs or so.

we could all make unpleasant observations about the history of how
we got to that version, but that's separate from the merits of the
current(?) code.