Re: missing icmp errors for udp packets

[Chris Wedgwood <cw@f00f.org>]

On Tue, Jul 31, 2001 at 10:59:39PM +0300, Pekka Savola wrote:

    bad ping responder == bad PR ;-)

    And anyway, who is anyone to judge what the system should be used
    for?

    I want a system to respond to ping without limitations; it's good
    for debugging, diagnostics, etc.  If I want, I can just filter the
    requests out, or rate-limit the responses.

People who want to do strange stuff can tweak via sysctl.

    However, ICMP error messages cannot be effectively filtered; they
    may happen due to TTL=0 when forwarding, legit or illegit UDP
    connection etc.; only way to effectively limit them is by
    rate-limiting.  If rate-limiting with informational and error
    types are the same, we have an inflexible situation here.

Networks are lossy, you can spill the odd packet anyhow.

It was just a suggestion that we merge all ICMP rate-limiting for
simplicity, I don't see it being an issue for the majority of users.

Perhaps I am wrong, in which case DaveM and Alexey will ignore me :)

I really don't see the need to continue to discuss this further on the
list, but by all means flame me in private!





  --cw