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  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]
Date:	Wed, 22 Oct 2014 18:10:25 +0200
From:	Kristian Evensen <>
To:	Eric Dumazet <>
Cc:	Network Development <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] tcp: Add TCP_FREEZE socket option


On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 5:54 PM, Eric Dumazet <> wrote:
> This asymmetry looks strange
> Following sequence should be allowed :
> getsockopt(...  TCP_FREEZE, &val, ...)
> setsockopt(...  TCP_FREEZE, &val, ...)
> So setsockopt() should accept val = 0

Thanks for you comment and I agree. The reasoning behind my original
ordering was that I wanted the values to be in the order which made
most logical sense to me, which is Enable (1), Disable (2) and Disable
with TR-ACK (3). However, I see now that when using the option and
when combined with getsockopt(), this does not make much sense. I will
wait for some more feedback and send a revised version tomorrow with
the following ordering: Disable (0), Enable (1), Disable with TR-ACK

Thanks again,
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists