From: Al Viro <viro@ftp.linux.org.uk>
To: David Stevens <dlstevens@us.ibm.com>
Cc: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
brian.haley@hp.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] IPv6: only modify checksum for UDP
Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2006 01:52:47 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20061114015247.GW29920@ftp.linux.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <OF31924028.FDB731A2-ON88257226.0006F081-88257226.00098A71@us.ibm.com>
On Mon, Nov 13, 2006 at 05:44:12PM -0800, David Stevens wrote:
> That's actually what I was suggesting. In 1's-complement,
> ~0 == -0 which is still 0, so barring any special case (like UDP's
> "0 means no checksum" rule), it should be equally valid for a
> packet to have 0 or ~0 as the checksum (with otherwise identical
> data)-- they are both correct, and equal to each other. That
> extra 1's-complement 0 is, of course, why UDP can have the
> special case of remapping 0->~0.
> Since the patch was for output-side, it doesn't matter
> whether you remap 0 to ~0 or not (except for the special case),
> but a receiver technically should allow either.
Could you please take a break from your Richard B. Johnson imitations
and read the fscking RFC?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-11-14 1:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-11-08 22:13 why do we mangle checksums for v6 ICMP? Al Viro
2006-11-08 22:28 ` Al Viro
2006-11-09 17:32 ` Brian Haley
2006-11-09 23:14 ` David Miller
2006-11-10 16:24 ` [PATCH] IPv6: only modify checksum for UDP Brian Haley
2006-11-10 17:54 ` David Stevens
2006-11-14 0:50 ` David Miller
2006-11-14 1:18 ` Al Viro
2006-11-14 1:44 ` David Stevens
2006-11-14 1:52 ` Al Viro [this message]
2006-11-10 22:55 ` David Miller
2006-11-10 23:17 ` Nivedita Singhvi
2006-11-10 23:26 ` David Miller
2006-11-10 23:36 ` Nivedita Singhvi
2006-11-12 1:30 ` Brian Haley
2006-11-10 16:25 ` [PATCH] IPv6: optimize echo reply checksum calculation Brian Haley
2006-11-10 17:34 ` Al Viro
2006-11-10 17:51 ` Brian Haley
2006-11-10 18:05 ` Al Viro
2006-11-10 18:20 ` Al Viro
2006-11-10 19:04 ` Brian Haley
2006-11-10 19:17 ` Al Viro
2006-11-10 21:06 ` Brian Haley
2006-11-11 1:45 ` Al Viro
2006-11-11 18:07 ` why do we mangle checksums for v6 ICMP? Bill Fink
2006-11-13 7:04 ` David Miller
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20061114015247.GW29920@ftp.linux.org.uk \
--to=viro@ftp.linux.org.uk \
--cc=brian.haley@hp.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=dlstevens@us.ibm.com \
--cc=netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.