From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S266252AbUHVGSQ (ORCPT ); Sun, 22 Aug 2004 02:18:16 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S266258AbUHVGSP (ORCPT ); Sun, 22 Aug 2004 02:18:15 -0400 Received: from qfep05.superonline.com ([212.252.122.162]:1524 "EHLO qfep05.superonline.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S266252AbUHVGSJ (ORCPT ); Sun, 22 Aug 2004 02:18:09 -0400 From: "Josan Kadett" To: "'Brad Campbell'" Cc: Subject: RE: Entirely ignoring TCP and UDP checksum in kernel level Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 09:18:11 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook, Build 11.0.5510 In-Reply-To: <41283A74.101@wasp.net.au> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1409 Thread-Index: AcSID51oQIgzwsw3R/ysjBlwKGiIcgACHgPg Message-Id: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Absolutely, that would correct the problem with the best possible resolution. -----Original Message----- From: Brad Campbell [mailto:brad@wasp.net.au] Sent: Sunday, August 22, 2004 8:17 AM To: Josan Kadett Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Entirely ignoring TCP and UDP checksum in kernel level So if we took any packet that came in from 192.168.1.1 and substituted 192.178.77.1 for the Source address and then re-calculated the IP checksum you would be up and running? Regards, Brad