Which one of the following you think that are simply wrong
to have such that they can introduce bugs?
- if we want to have an admin knob to fix up the ttl to handle
problem apps (and the admin really cannot fix/kill the problem
app itself!) why isn't one ttl tunable (for ip) enough? What does
it mean to provide ndd tunable for tcp_def_ttl, ip_def_ttl (which
is really icmp_err_ttl) and icmp_def_ttl (which is really raw ip ttl)?
And what does it mean to provide a tunable for ipv6 unicast hops?
isn't it solving the issue of having one 'big button' for the entire
host.. having a tunable per 'ulp' at least narrows down the
effect/change to respective protocol apps.. by having one tunable for
entire host aren't we again talking of 'big button' aka effecting all
the other apps.
Further HP-Ux has tcp_def_ttl, udp_def_ttl, ip_def_ttl and rawip_def_ttl
tunnables. Strange thing is they have a separate tunable for raw IP.
~Girish
_______________________________________________
networking-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
