From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Rick Jones Subject: wither bounds checking for networking sysctls Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2007 18:09:17 -0700 Message-ID: <46D76A3D.9090207@hp.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Linux Network Development list Return-path: Received: from palrel13.hp.com ([156.153.255.238]:59577 "EHLO palrel13.hp.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752812AbXHaBJj (ORCPT ); Thu, 30 Aug 2007 21:09:39 -0400 Received: from tardy.cup.hp.com (tardy.cup.hp.com [15.244.56.217]) by palrel13.hp.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A16B39391 for ; Thu, 30 Aug 2007 18:09:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tardy.cup.hp.com (8.9.3 (PHNE_28810)/8.9.3 SMKit7.02) with ESMTP id SAA04473 for ; Thu, 30 Aug 2007 18:09:17 -0700 (PDT) Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org While messing about with "sysctl_tcp_rto_min" I went back and forth a bit as to whether there should have been bounds checking (as did some of the folks who did some internal review for me). That leads to the question - is it considered worthwhile to add a bit more bounds checking to sundry networking sysctls? rick jones