> > In messaFrom firstname.lastname@example.org Sun Jun 30 13:50:12 1996
Received: from orchard.washtenaw.cc.mi.us (orchard.washtenaw.cc.mi.us [126.96.36.199]) by herbie.ucs.indiana.edu (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id NAA06736 for <email@example.com>; Sun, 30 Jun 1996 13:50:12 -0500
Received: from vger.rutgers.edu by orchard.washtenaw.cc.mi.us (8.6.10/2.3)
with ESMTP id OAA16562; Sun, 30 Jun 1996 14:51:26 -0400
Received: by vger.rutgers.edu id <105662-11720>; Sun, 30 Jun 1996 14:42:45 -0500
From: "A.N.Kuznetsov" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Subject: Re: Recipe for disaster
To: email@example.com (Eric Schenk)
Date: Sun, 30 Jun 1996 22:41:50 +0400 (MSD)
In-Reply-To: <96Jun30.firstname.lastname@example.org> from "Eric Schenk" at Jun 30, 96 02:03:28 pm
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24]
> While I'm writing, I just noticed a posting on comp.os.linux.networking
> that complains that you can freeze a linux kernel by opening up
> a socket pair and dumping a couple of dozen megabytes of data across it
> in one chunk.
Note, that my fix to dev.c will not cure this problem.
I was afraid that extensive dropping could break router/bridge,
when working on interrupt at peak loads is normal and
dropped just ONE packet.
Change break to continue to cure the second problem.