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
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2009 00:32:45 -0400 From: Bill Fink <billfink@...dspring.com> To: William Allen Simpson <william.allen.simpson@...il.com> Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 8/8] Document future removal of sysctl_tcp_* options On Wed, 21 Oct 2009, William Allen Simpson wrote: > 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. And as mentioned previously, the global options can be quite useful in certain test scenarios. I also agree the per route settings are a very useful addition. I think the global and per route settings are complementary and shouldn't be thought of as in conflict with one another. -Bill -- 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
Powered by blists - more mailing lists