"Jason A. Donenfeld" <[email protected]> writes: > On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 5:02 PM, PaX Team <[email protected]> wrote: >> are you sure it was for satisfying PaX only and not a bug itself? :) > > Blurg. I was overly hasty. Note to self: do not prepare conf > presentations and push code at the same time. Indeed this /should/ be > ~0, which means "unset". I can't see any bugs by making it 0, but it > would make things "semantically incorrect", I think. > > So the bug is actually in the ipv6 fragmentation code. I just sent a > patch upstream and CC'd you and Emese.
Wooh! FYI I was seeing the bug being triggered on IPv4 as well... -Toke _______________________________________________ WireGuard mailing list [email protected] http://lists.zx2c4.com/mailman/listinfo/wireguard
