nanog mailing list archives
Re: ip options
From: Roland Dobbins <rdobbins () arbor net>
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2009 02:20:21 +0700
On Oct 29, 2009, at 2:05 AM, Luca Tosolini wrote:
Considering the security hazard that they imply, I am therefore thinkingto drop them.
You should certainly consider the impact on traceroute and possibly QoS (i.e., RSVP, if it's relevant) in your environment.
Some vendors/platforms also have the option to ignore, rather than drop. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Roland Dobbins <rdobbins () arbor net> // <http://www.arbornetworks.com> Sorry, sometimes I mistake your existential crises for technical insights. -- xkcd #625
Current thread:
- ip options Luca Tosolini (Oct 28)
- RE: ip options Dario Ciccarone (dciccaro) (Oct 28)
- Re: ip options Roland Dobbins (Oct 28)
- PPPoE vs. Bridged ADSL JD (Oct 28)
- Re: PPPoE vs. Bridged ADSL Jack Bates (Oct 28)
- Re: PPPoE vs. Bridged ADSL Saxon Jones (Oct 28)
- Re: PPPoE vs. Bridged ADSL David E. Smith (Oct 28)
- Re: PPPoE vs. Bridged ADSL Walter Keen (Oct 28)
- Re: PPPoE vs. Bridged ADSL Mark Smith (Oct 28)
- Re: PPPoE vs. Bridged ADSL Nathan Ward (Oct 28)
- Re: PPPoE vs. Bridged ADSL Sean Donelan (Oct 29)
- RE: PPPoE vs. Bridged ADSL Vince Mammoliti (Oct 29)
- Re: PPPoE vs. Bridged ADSL Jack Bates (Oct 29)
- PPPoE vs. Bridged ADSL JD (Oct 28)