Re: Re- TCP broadcast storm
Jon Postel <postel@isi.edu> Mon, 08 November 1993 16:51 UTC
Received: from ietf.nri.reston.va.us by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa13736; 8 Nov 93 11:51 EST
Received: from CNRI.RESTON.VA.US by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa13732; 8 Nov 93 11:51 EST
Received: from venera.isi.edu by CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa08179; 8 Nov 93 11:51 EST
Received: from zephyr.isi.edu by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-14) id <AA27270>; Mon, 8 Nov 1993 08:43:12 -0800
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-13) id <AA24710>; Mon, 8 Nov 1993 08:43:10 -0800
Date: Mon, 08 Nov 1993 08:43:10 -0800
Sender: ietf-archive-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US
From: Jon Postel <postel@isi.edu>
Message-Id: <199311081643.AA24710@zephyr.isi.edu>
To: braden@isi.edu
Subject: Re: Re- TCP broadcast storm
Cc: ietf-hosts@isi.edu, TCP-Group@ucsd.edu, MGauthier@iit.nrc.ca
Bob: Well, Ethernet broadcast storms are caused by the hosts misbehaving, but they behave in a way that overloads the network, so that other traffic from other hosts does not get through. In the Morris Worm situation, i don't think the network was overloaded, and traffic from uninfected hosts did get transmitted normally. Certainly from the end users point of view it hardly matters if it is the network that is broken or it is the hosts that are broken or even if it is the database (or whatever) services that are broken. From the end users point of view, it doesn't work, and the "it" is the Internet. --jon.
- Re: Re- TCP broadcast storm Bob Braden
- Re: Re- TCP broadcast storm Jon Postel
- Re: Re- TCP broadcast storm Bob Braden
- Re: Re- TCP broadcast storm Jon Postel
- Re- TCP broadcast storm Phil Karn
- Re: Re- TCP broadcast storm Bob Braden