Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!samsung!think!snorkelwacker!mit-eddie!uw-beaver!uw-entropy!quick!srg
From: srg@quick.COM (Spencer Garrett)
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip
Subject: Re: more on Fletcher
Message-ID: <7368@quick.COM>
Date: 9 Dec 89 07:07:18 GMT
References: <8912060542.AA05854@WLV.IMSD.CONTEL.COM> <1989Dec7.203820.1337@brutus.cs.uiuc.edu>
Organization: Quicksilver Engineering, Seattle
Lines: 12


The problem is worse than might be imagined.  In relying on link-level
checksums not only are you vulnerable to errors occurring between
your application or its peer and their respective link-level
interfaces, but also on the same pathway *and the software* on
every gateway in between.  Given the choice between a) computing
checksums/CRC's every time and b) trying to figure out/negotiate
when to use them my inclination runs strongly toward the former.
Given how easy it is to do CRC's in software (even 32-bit ones)
I, for one, wish we could somehow convert to them instead of the
weak checksum presently in use, but failing that I sure wish
the current checksums weren't optional.  Are you listening, Sun?