TwIP - An IP Stack In a Tweet
Adam Dunkels writes "Inspired by the Twitter-sized program that crashes Mac OS X, I just wrote a really, really rudimentary IP stack called twIP, small enough to fit in a Twitter tweet. Although
twIP is very far away from a real IP stack,
it can do the first task of any IP stack: respond to
pings. The entire source code can be found in this 128-character-long tweet. For those who are interested in low-level network programming, a code walkthrough with instructions on how to run the code under FreeBSD is available here. The FAQ: Q: why? A: for fun."
The underlying system must provide a way for user programs to receive and send IP packets.
This is where I stopped reading. Just... no. This is just a program that echoes every single thing back to the originator.
Shit doesn't smell like roses when it is made to fits into a tweet or is in any other way related to Twitter.
--- Eat my sig.
Haha! This article is rated purple (2 levels above the lowest -- black) already. Wow.
Anyhow. The fact that the TwIP program requires an IP stack to work is the prime indication that it doesn't really do all that much. Since it can work with raw socket access, and switches the addresses around, well, props, but TFA's "header" code comment says this:
updating the ICMP checksum
which is then contradicted by the code comment before the address swap:
Since we only swap bytes in the IP header, we do not need to update the IP header checksum.
using ICMP and IP interchangeably..?
timothy, take this down. Now. It's your only chance to save face with this article.
If you converted Apache into a web browser that might actually be worthy of a story...
It's not an IP stack at all (and requires one to function). It replies to a packet that is assumed to be a ping without any error checking. In other words, it's a very short, clever, but minimally functional ping function. The fact that it's short is nice, but that's about it.
impressive, huh?
The MAFIAA is a bunch of mindless jerks who will be the first up against the wall when the revolution comes
Yeah, but for(;;) loops forever, whereas while(1) only loops while 1 is true. It's completely different! What if 1 becomes false?!
No existe.