Full Disclosure mailing list archives
Re: Revised paper on "ICMP attacks against TCP"
From: Łukasz Bromirski <lbromirski () mr0vka eu org>
Date: Sat, 10 Sep 2005 20:43:40 +0200
Florian Weimer wrote:
IIRC, those Cisco products that are not vulnerable to the PMTU just don't implement PMTUD, right?You can explicitly enable PMTUD if you want ("ip tcp path-mtu-discovery"). It's recommended to reduce CPU overhead for processing BGP message (no kidding, apparently it id make a difference in the past).
It's still making a difference and not only on Cisco products. When You have MTU sized down to 576 it's quite harder to push full BGP table fast. When MTU is 1500, or something around that, you're just synchronizing faster, because You may pack more information in one packet. There's a bunch of presentations freely available that show performance of BGP sessions with various network-level tweaks. -- this space was intentionally left blank | Łukasz Bromirski you can insert your favourite quote here | lukasz:bromirski,net _______________________________________________ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
Current thread:
- Revised paper on "ICMP attacks against TCP" Fernando Gont (Sep 05)
- RE: Revised paper on "ICMP attacks against TCP" alex (Sep 05)
- RE: Revised paper on "ICMP attacks against TCP" Fernando Gont (Sep 10)
- Re: Revised paper on "ICMP attacks against TCP" Florian Weimer (Sep 10)
- Re: Revised paper on "ICMP attacks against TCP" Łukasz Bromirski (Sep 10)
- RE: Revised paper on "ICMP attacks against TCP" Fernando Gont (Sep 10)
- RE: Revised paper on "ICMP attacks against TCP" alex (Sep 05)