11–20 of 39 posts
In 1990 Bergen LUG implemented TCP over Avian Carriers. http://www.blug.linux.no/rfc1149/ The ping over that link was not good http://www.blug.linux.no/rfc1149/pinglogg/
While a very good story, I suspect the offending firewalls might drop traffic with any of the reserved bits set, not just the "evil" bit. Very fun exercise though!
I think it was done just for fun. It is slightly concerning that a live equipment has such a joke enabled, but I'd say its fun-to-price ratio is relatively high.
> Is it that someone didn’t see the date of the RFC, maybe sarcasm doesn’t translate very well, possibly someone in the real world actually sent the evil bit when doing evil things, and cause some products to target it? I think it was done just for fun. It is slightly concerning that a live equipment has such a joke enabled, but I'd say its fun-to-price ratio is relatively high.
Also: IIRC IP packets contain CRC's/checksums of some sort. I'm not sure if the poster corrected for that or maybe the other side does(n't) and somewhere the CRC doesn't check out and thus the packet is dropped/invalid (or maybe even somewhere along the way by at a hop that chokes on such bit)?
I yearn for a world in which that RFC were viable. I love that anyone's implemented it at all though, and I really hope it's deliberate on the part of the people who drop the packet.
Similarly I have had a page online for years (may still be, can't remember the exact url... so I'd have to dig a little) that was served with HTTP status
418 I'm a teapot
> Is it that someone didn’t see the date of the RFC, maybe sarcasm doesn’t translate very well, possibly someone in the real world actually sent the evil bit when doing evil things, and cause some products to target it? I think it was done just for fun. It is slightly concerning that a live equipment has such a joke enabled, but I'd say its fun-to-price ratio is relatively high.
I'm not intimately familiar with the RFC's but you could argue that since that bit is technically `reserved` when it's set the packet is 'invalid' and thus should be dropped (by some manufacturers reasoning maybe, not mine specifically)? Also: IIRC IP packets contain CRC's/checksums of some sort. I'm not sure if the poster corrected for that or maybe the other side does(n't) and somewhere the CRC doesn't check out an…
> Is it that someone didn’t see the date of the RFC, maybe sarcasm doesn’t translate very well, possibly someone in the real world actually sent the evil bit when doing evil things, and cause some products to target it? I think it was done just for fun. It is slightly concerning that a live equipment has such a joke enabled, but I'd say its fun-to-price ratio is relatively high.
I'm not intimately familiar with the RFC's but you could argue that since that bit is technically `reserved` when it's set the packet is 'invalid' and thus should be dropped (by some manufacturers reasoning maybe, not mine specifically)? Also: IIRC IP packets contain CRC's/checksums of some sort. I'm not sure if the poster corrected for that or maybe the other side does(n't) and somewhere the CRC doesn't check out an…
While a very good story, I suspect the offending firewalls might drop traffic with any of the reserved bits set, not just the "evil" bit. Very fun exercise though!
This seems like a really bad thing to do. If any of those reserved bits get used for a legitimate purpose in the future then none of these networks will be accessible. Reserved should mean "set to 0 when you send, ignore on when you receive". It's not like these bits actually cost any additional processing. There's literally no benefit to dropping these packets, and it's shenanigans like this that mean we can't impro…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not intimately familiar with the RFC's but you could argue that since that bit is technically `reserved` when it's set the packet is 'invalid' and thus should be dropped (by some manufacturers reasoning maybe, not mine specifically)? Also: IIRC IP packets contain CRC's/checksums of some sort. I'm not sure if the poster corrected for that or maybe the other side does(n't) and somewhere the CRC doesn't check out an…
He patched the IP stack, so the checksum should be correct.
Also, as barosl observes (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10633361): "but I guess if one is following the RFC rigorously, dropping packets with the reserved bit enabled is the correct"