On Oct 7, 2012, at 5:35 PM, Fernando Gont wrote:
> e.g., it's easier to refer to each of the fragments in a, say, four-fragment
> packet as "{first, second, third, fourth} fragment" as
> oposed to....mm.. initial fragment, last fragment, and... what about the two
> "middle" fragments?
>From a purely network engineering standpoint, there are only initial fragments
>and non-initial fragments. Apart from that distinction, ordering really only
>applies on the relevant endpoints.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Roland Dobbins <[email protected]> // <http://www.arbornetworks.com>
Luck is the residue of opportunity and design.
-- John Milton
_______________________________________________
OPSEC mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsec
