From: Cong Wang <amwang@redhat.com>
To: Neil Horman <nhorman@tuxdriver.com>
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
Alexey Kuznetsov <kuznet@ms2.inr.ac.ru>,
Patrick McHardy <kaber@trash.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH net-next] tcp: introduce tcp_tw_interval to specifiy the time of TIME-WAIT
Date: Mon, 08 Oct 2012 11:17:37 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1349666257.2707.6.camel@cr0> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20121002120927.GA691@hmsreliant.think-freely.org>
On Tue, 2012-10-02 at 08:09 -0400, Neil Horman wrote:
> No, its not very friendly, but the people using this are violating the RFC,
> which isn't very friendly. :)
Could you be more specific? In RFC 793, AFAIK, it is allowed to be
changed:
http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc793
" To be sure that a TCP does not create a segment that carries a
sequence number which may be duplicated by an old segment remaining in
the network, the TCP must keep quiet for a maximum segment lifetime
(MSL) before assigning any sequence numbers upon starting up or
recovering from a crash in which memory of sequence numbers in use was
lost. For this specification the MSL is taken to be 2 minutes. This
is an engineering choice, and may be changed if experience indicates
it is desirable to do so."
or I must still be missing something here... :)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-10-08 3:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-09-27 8:41 [RFC PATCH net-next] tcp: introduce tcp_tw_interval to specifiy the time of TIME-WAIT Cong Wang
2012-09-27 14:23 ` Neil Horman
2012-09-27 17:02 ` Rick Jones
2012-09-28 6:33 ` Cong Wang
2012-09-28 6:43 ` David Miller
2012-09-28 17:30 ` Rick Jones
2012-09-28 13:16 ` Neil Horman
2012-10-02 7:04 ` Cong Wang
2012-10-02 12:09 ` Neil Horman
2012-10-08 3:17 ` Cong Wang [this message]
2012-10-08 14:07 ` Neil Horman
2012-10-09 3:42 ` Cong Wang
2012-09-27 17:05 ` David Miller
2012-09-28 6:39 ` Cong Wang
2012-09-28 6:44 ` David Miller
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1349666257.2707.6.camel@cr0 \
--to=amwang@redhat.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=kaber@trash.net \
--cc=kuznet@ms2.inr.ac.ru \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nhorman@tuxdriver.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.