Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 24 Apr 2002 14:13:55 -0400 | From | Jeff Garzik <> | Subject | Re: AW: Re: AW: Re: VLAN and Network Drivers 2.4.x |
| |
On Wed, Apr 24, 2002 at 09:07:23PM +0300, Matti Aarnio wrote: > On Wed, Apr 24, 2002 at 01:49:33PM -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote: > ... > > The tulip patch is butt-ugly - the oversized allocation isn't needed, > > and it just flat-out turns off large packet protection. That's really > > not what you want to do, even for the best tulip cards. If an oversized > > gram (non-VLAN) makes it into a network which such a patched tulip > > driver, you can DoS. > > It all depends... At least the cisco switches I have used have > protection by controlling on how large frames you can send, and > having automatic enlarging of frame size for VLAN Trunking port. > > Of course those switches have some amounts of "jumbogram support" > as well at port by port basis. > > So perhaps you can DoS your machine off the net (or your stream > very least), but not other machines.
The DoS certainly assumes that one can send jumbo datagrams to the target machine via a local network. There are a multitude of ways one can prevent the DoS present in the tulip VLAN patch, what you name is certainly one of them.
Jeff
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |