netdev - Re: [PATCH v2 8/8] Document future removal of sysctl_tcp

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <4ADF616B.1090405@gmail.com>
Date:	Wed, 21 Oct 2009 15:30:51 -0400
From:	William Allen Simpson <william.allen.simpson@...il.com>
To:	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 8/8] Document future removal of sysctl_tcp_* options

Gilad Ben-Yossef wrote:
> I have no issue with leaving those, if everyone thinks we're better off.
> 
> BTW, while we're talking about OS envy, I do believe that Windows do let
> you specify on a per route basis. Not that this is really a good ground for
> technical decision, but still... :-)
> 
I'm not concerned with "envy", I'm concerned with training operators, and
consistency across platforms.

I'm in favor of per route configuration, it seems reasonably clean, as
long as it's done consistently with other systems.  I don't permit Windows
systems to be used here (except under controlled security circumstances), so
I'm not familiar with their configuration.  However, doing things similarly
across platforms will ease documentation and training.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html