From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andi Kleen Subject: Re: [RFC/PATCH] "strict" ipv4 reassembly Date: Tue, 17 May 2005 21:53:08 +0200 Message-ID: References: <20050517.104947.112621738.davem@davemloft.net> <428A3F86.1020000@us.ibm.com> <428A425F.7000807@hp.com> <428A452B.2010008@us.ibm.com> <428A470A.6010703@hp.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: netdev@oss.sgi.com Return-path: To: Rick Jones In-Reply-To: <428A470A.6010703@hp.com> (Rick Jones's message of "Tue, 17 May 2005 12:33:30 -0700") Sender: netdev-bounce@oss.sgi.com Errors-to: netdev-bounce@oss.sgi.com List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org Rick Jones writes: >> Actually, the problem is much worse now - we have virtual >> partitions in the Xen environment for instance where some >> packets are headed for local consumption (virtual network, >> no actual network latency to speak of) and some going >> out to the network. Having a global IP id generator just >> won't be able to keep up - we could wrap in submilliseconds... > > and the classic TCP sequence number isn't _really_ all that far behind :) But it has PAWS at least. But I agree even IPv6 fragmentation with 32bit IDs is not significantly safer. -Andi