![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
David Schwartz <davids@webmaster.com> wrote: > >> Regardless of whatever verifications your application is doing >> on the data, it is not checksumming the ports and that's what >> the pseudo-header is helping with. > > So what? We are in the case where the data has already gotten to him. If it > got to him in error, he'll reject it anyway. The receive checksum check will > only reject packets that he would reject anyway. That makes it needless. What if it goes to the wrong recipient who doesn't have the upper- level checksums? This is the whole point, IPv6 unlike IPv4 does not have IP header checksums so the high-level needs to protect it by checksumming the pseudo-header. Cheers, -- Visit Openswan at http://www.openswan.org/ Email: Herbert Xu ~{PmV>HI~} <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au> Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/ PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt - 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/ | ||||||||||||
| Last update: 2007-11-24 07:03 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||||