Path: utzoo!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!lll-winken!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!sdd.hp.com!ucsd!sdcc6!jclark
From: jclark@sdcc6.ucsd.edu (John Clark)
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip
Subject: Re: CWRU student prevented from teaching how to send ethernet packets
Message-ID: <17222@sdcc6.ucsd.edu>
Date: 5 Mar 91 19:32:23 GMT
References: <1991Feb27.014104.30007@m.cs.uiuc.edu> <1991Feb26.233447.9017@usenet.ins.cwru.edu> <1991Feb27.144731.23147@usenet.ins.cwru.edu>
Organization: University of California, San Diego
Lines: 19

In article <1991Feb27.144731.23147@usenet.ins.cwru.edu> cjs@po.CWRU.Edu (Christopher J. Seline) writes:
+
+I wrote a program that puts packets on ethernet and takes responce packets 
+off; the idea that my (or any) program could be modified to send n+1 packets
+(swamping our 100M FDDI fiber backbone) scared them; my program didn't do 
+that -- but it (And any other program) could be modified to do so.

What is so special about such a program. Most intro texts on tcp
inplementation have examples of this. Clearly just writing a piece
of code which talks to various 'echo' services could do the
'swamping'. Big deal.

Of course if you have a way to bring down the net maybe you should
post an article stating the hole in argument that says access to the
net will resonably likely for all users.
-- 

John Clark
jclark@ucsd.edu