Michael Graff writes:
>bad@flatlin.ka.sub.org (Christoph Badura) writes:
>> Michael Graff writes:
>> >However, I don't agree that we should allow "bad" packets to be transmitted
>> >using sendto().  IMHO, if you are going to do this, use BPF directly.
>> Why?  Do you have any reasons for that?

>Why should we _allow_ our IP output code to send bad packets?

Because, as Doug Gwyn said, Unix wasn't designed to prevent you from
doing stupid things...

>IMHO,
>trapping errors is much more important than the (somewhat specific)
>use of sending bad packets to test stacks.

I think that these are different things that are largely independent.

I also think that the networking code should not panic because there's
some illegal or unexpected value in some protocol header.  This is a
separate issue from being able to send illegal packets.

-- 
Christoph Badura	bad@flatlin.ka.sub.org

You don't need to quote my .signature.  Everyone has seen it by now.
Besides, it doesn't add anything to the current thread.