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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).