lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2002]   [Feb]   [7]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: want opinions on possible glitch in 2.4 network error reporti ng
Chris Friesen <cfriesen@nortelnetworks.com> [02/02/07 16:04]:
> under our control. It seems to me to be logical to block the sender
> until the congestion goes away, or return with an error code if the
> sender is non-blocking. This may not play nice with the current kernel
> networking code (qdisc and all that) but doesn't it seem like a good
> idea in principle?

If not, it is then possible for a user on a fast machine to hammer the
network interfaces with UDP packets as some sort of denial of service
attack?

Blocking all senders when the qdisc is full and round-robin'ing among
the blocked would prevent this particular attack.
-
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: 2005-03-22 13:24    [W:0.047 / U:8.244 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site