Re: [RFC/PATCH] "strict" ipv4 reassembly

[Thomas Graf <tgraf@suug.ch>]

* Herbert Xu <20050519124821.GA686@gondor.apana.org.au> 2005-05-19 22:48
> On Thu, May 19, 2005 at 02:23:19PM +0200, Thomas Graf wrote:
> > 
> > I agree, however defining a value of 600 system wide is horrible for
> > all hosts that behave "correctly". So what we could do is take probes
> > of the id distribution and define the threshold on a per peer scope.
> > 
> > Example: Once in a while we start a probe and set a bit in a bitmap
> > for every id that matches a defined window. Not sure about the size of
> > that bitmap yet but 2048 bits might be a good start. The first fragment
> 
> Sorry, but this scheme is way too complex for a problem that only affects
> a tiny section of the community.  If you really want to do this then
> do it as a static route flag instead of something that the system tries
> to auto-detect.

Yes, it's currently quite complex, I'm trying to reduce it to something
simpler. If we do the route flag thing then we should allow the same flag
for permanent neighbours as well.