Re: Other possible protection against RST/SYN attacks (was Re: T

看板FB_security作者時間22年前 (2004/04/22 13:18), 編輯推噓0(000)
留言0則, 0人參與, 最新討論串8/16 (看更多)
Charles Swiger wrote: > On Apr 21, 2004, at 4:14 PM, Mike Tancsa wrote: > >> What side effects if any are there? Why is the default 64 and not >> some other number like 255... > > > The default TTL gets decremented with every hop, which means that a > packet coming in with a TTL of 255 had to be sent by a directly > connected system. [ip_ttl is an octet, so it can't hold a larger TTL > value.] Huh? 255-- == 254, not 0. A TTL of 255 just allows the maximum possible number of hops, before being declared hopelessly lost. > A packet with a TTL of 64 could have been many hops away. As DES said in a later reply, 64 was probably just a reasonable, but arbitrary value. Whereas 255 would probably allow for several trips around the world, and would be overkill. Gary _______________________________________________ freebsd-security@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-security To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-security-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
文章代碼(AID): #10XrN300 (FB_security)
討論串 (同標題文章)
完整討論串 (本文為第 8 之 16 篇):
文章代碼(AID): #10XrN300 (FB_security)