>>>>> On Thu, 30 Jun 2005 11:45:15 +0400, Roman Tsiroulnikov <[EMAIL 
>>>>> PROTECTED]> said:

Roman> Thank you for fast reply!

No problem.  Thanks for explaining the problem so well!  Anytime
people give us a well documented reproducible bug it makes it much
easier to track down the problem.  And then you supplied a patch as
well!

However, the patch you actually supplied broke things in other ways.
In particular, you check for the expected pdu length being <= 0.  The
check_packet routine actually returns a -1 for serious error, where
the connection should be dropped, and a 0 for "I don't even have
enough data to determine how much data I need to expect".  Thus,
really slow trickles over slow/broken networks will cause problems.
So the patch wasn't applied directly as is, but modified so that it
only closes the stream iff a -1 was returned.

Roman> Yes, at this time, it's reproducible only via TCP, but, in principle, 
Roman> there was no matter, what transport we are using.

It would break for all stream-based protocols.  However, you original
message said that UDP was an issue to, but it was not as it's not a
stream based protocol...

-- 
Wes Hardaker
Sparta, Inc.


-------------------------------------------------------
SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration Strategies
from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps, straightforward articles,
informative Webcasts and more! Get everything you need to get up to
speed, fast. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7477&alloc_id=16492&op=click
_______________________________________________
Net-snmp-coders mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/net-snmp-coders

Reply via email to