Re: A strange TCP timestamp problem?

[Lloyd Parkes <lloyd%must-have-coffee.gen.nz@localhost>]

> On 27/06/2016, at 9:56 PM, Edgar Fuß <ef%math.uni-bonn.de@localhost> wrote:
> 
> I understand the argument against sending something based on uptime instead. 
> What about sending something based on real time instead?

I would be a bit twitchy about using any source related to the real world.

How about using a cheap pseudo-random number generator seeded with a fixed value? The generator doesn’t need to be secure (after all, we are currently using the number “1”), it just needs to be able to fool defective software from Well Known Network Component Supplier C.

Cheers,
Lloyd