tasklwIP - A Lightweight TCP/IP stack - Tasks: task #7272, LWIP_ICMP option

 
 

You are not allowed to post comments on this tracker with your current authentication level.

task #7272: LWIP_ICMP option

Submitter:  Frédéric Bernon <fbernon>
Submitted:  Tue 04 Sep 2007 08:09:37 AM UTC
   
 
Category:  None Should Start On:  Mon 03 Sep 2007 10:00:00 PM UTC
Should be Finished on:  Mon 03 Sep 2007 10:00:00 PM UTC Priority:  5 - Normal
Status:  Done Privacy:  Public
Assigned to:  fbernon Percent Complete:  100%
Open/Closed:  Closed Planned Release:  1.3.0
Effort:  0.00

Jump to the original submission

Wed 05 Sep 2007 05:42:21 PM UTC, comment #9: 

Ok, thank. So, I can close this task...

Frédéric Bernon <fbernon>
Group Member
Wed 05 Sep 2007 05:39:58 PM UTC, comment #8: 

UDP is meant to send ICMP destination unreachable when there's no pcb. TCP sends a RST. It doesn't send ICMP.

Strictly you should report ICMP destination unreachable for UDP, but heck, most machines with firewalls don't anyway. So allowing it to be turned off doesn't seem that evil.

Jonathan Larmour <jifl>
Group Member
Wed 05 Sep 2007 05:23:13 PM UTC, comment #7: 

Ok, so, it's check in. I add the comment in opt.h to warn compliance problem.

>I have note that icmp_dest_unreach is called in udp.c when a datagram is receive but no matching pcb is found, but, there is no such behavior on tcp_in.c. Comments?


Is this last point is a problem or not (to be compliant, with LWIP_ICMP=1) ?

Frédéric Bernon <fbernon>
Group Member
Wed 05 Sep 2007 03:30:36 PM UTC, comment #6: 

There's no harm to this, so I'm ok with it.

Jared Grubb <jgrubb>
Group Member
Wed 05 Sep 2007 02:21:05 PM UTC, comment #5: 

Fine with me in principle, although I haven't looked into the detail of the patch.

Kieran Mansley <kieranm>
Group Member
Wed 05 Sep 2007 08:58:44 AM UTC, comment #4: 

But about compliance, I think I should add a comment in opt.h like "if you disable ICMP, your product will not be compliant with RFCxxx".

Frédéric Bernon <fbernon>
Group Member
Wed 05 Sep 2007 08:11:18 AM UTC, comment #3: 

Even, if it is "non-compliant", it stay an usual way to limit DoS attacks on the Internet (most of hacking tools start port scanning only if they detect an IP with a "ping"). More, if you don't need ICMP, I suppose than disabling the code to reduce footprint is something useful (and in the same spirit than the other option we got).

But, in all cases, since LWIP_ICMP=1 per default in opt.h, so, there will not any changes from the current behavior.

Frédéric Bernon <fbernon>
Group Member
Tue 04 Sep 2007 11:52:39 PM UTC, comment #2: 

Disabling ICMP would make the stack non-compliant, right? Is this something anyone would want to do?

Jared Grubb <jgrubb>
Group Member
Tue 04 Sep 2007 10:48:12 PM UTC, comment #1: 

I attach a patch file. No objects to check in ?


(file #13879)

Frédéric Bernon <fbernon>
Group Member
Tue 04 Sep 2007 08:09:37 AM UTC, original submission:  

I would like to introduce a LWIP_ICMP option (enabled per default in opt.h, so, no change with current behavior at build and runtime) to be able to disable the code when I don't need it (reduce footprint, or reduce "visibility" on the Internet). Is there any objections on that ?

I have note that icmp_dest_unreach is called in udp.c when a datagram is receive but no matching pcb is found, but, there is no such behavior on tcp_in.c. Comments?


Frédéric Bernon <fbernon>
Group Member

 

(Note: upload size limit is set to 16384 kB, after insertion of the required escape characters.)

Attached Files
file #13879:  LWIP_ICMP.patch added by fbernon (5KiB - application/octet-stream)

 

Depends on the following items: None found

Items that depend on this one: None found

 

Carbon-Copy List
  • -email is unavailable- added by jifl (Posted a comment)
  • -email is unavailable- added by kieranm (Posted a comment)
  • -email is unavailable- added by jgrubb (Posted a comment)
  • -email is unavailable- added by fbernon (Submitted the item)
  •  

    There are 0 votes so far. Votes easily highlight which items people would like to see resolved in priority, independently of the priority of the item set by tracker managers.

     

    Follow 8 latest changes.

    Date Changed by Updated Field Previous Value => Replaced by
    2007-09-05 fbernon StatusIn Progress Done
        Percent Complete90% 100%
        Open/ClosedOpen Closed
    2007-09-05 fbernon StatusNone In Progress
        Percent Complete50% 90%
        Planned ReleaseNone 1.3.0
    2007-09-04 fbernon Attached File- Added LWIP_ICMP.patch, #13879
        Percent Complete0% 50%

    Back to the top

    Powered by Savane 3.13-caa5.
    Corresponding source code