Matthew X. Economou wrote:
not very important but wouldn't it be better to set the checksum
to 0 instead of some arbitrary (?) and confusing value then ?
No, as not setting the checksum is a (minor) optimization. Setting that
field to any arbitrary constant means at least one completely
On Sun, 2007-Jan-21 09:32:10 -0500, Louis Mamakos wrote:
However, since it is a 1's complement checksum, there is a distinguished
value (all zero bits) that you could set the checksum field to that
wouldn't occur for a normal computed checksum.
That's a useful idea.
Since the presence of a
not very important but wouldn't it be better to set the checksum
to 0 instead of some arbitrary (?) and confusing value then ?
No, as not setting the checksum is a (minor) optimization. Setting that
field to any arbitrary constant means at least one completely
unnecessary CPU instruction per
that's very clever indeed ! Well, I was not quite sure it was
actually performing the TCO (not to say I feel stupid ...).
not very important but wouldn't it be better to set the checksum
to 0 instead of some arbitrary (?) and confusing value then ?
thank you anyway,
Roman.
Kris Kennaway wrote:
Hi everyone,
It's been about a year or so that I upgrade my box to RELENG_6
from time to time. I got some suprises this week, I've seen a
few things that made me think of hardware problems but some are
definitly soft.
First and easy one, tcpdump -v does not show checksum error
for UDP whereas
On Thu, Jan 18, 2007 at 03:34:46PM +0100, Roman Le Houelleur wrote:
Hi everyone,
It's been about a year or so that I upgrade my box to RELENG_6
from time to time. I got some suprises this week, I've seen a
few things that made me think of hardware problems but some are
definitly soft.
