[lkml]   [2006]   [May]   [22]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: Was change to ip_push_pending_frames intended to break udp (more specifically, WCCP?)
On Llu, 2006-05-22 at 11:48 -0700, Rick Jones wrote:
> ID of zero again? I thought that went away years ago? Anyway, given
> the number of "helpful" devices out there willing to clear the DF bit,
> fragment and forward, perhaps always setting the IP ID to 0, even if DF
> is set, isn't such a good idea?

Any device that clears DF is so terminally broken that you've already
lost the battle the moment you bought it.


To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2006-05-22 23:00    [W:0.044 / U:8.748 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site