From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Florian Westphal Subject: Re: [RFC] SIP conntrack handler and TCP fragmentation Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2016 13:41:40 +0200 Message-ID: <20161012114140.GB26177@breakpoint.cc> References: <20161012075212.GA26177@breakpoint.cc> <1e3ffb89-2c24-526a-01aa-53794d554202@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Florian Westphal , netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org, Patrick McHardy To: Ulrich Weber Return-path: Received: from Chamillionaire.breakpoint.cc ([146.0.238.67]:35352 "EHLO Chamillionaire.breakpoint.cc" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752706AbcJLLm2 (ORCPT ); Wed, 12 Oct 2016 07:42:28 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1e3ffb89-2c24-526a-01aa-53794d554202@gmail.com> Sender: netfilter-devel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Ulrich Weber wrote: > From reading the code this fixed the problem when Content-Length > points to one of the next TCP fragments. Right. > In our case Content-Length is always 0 with a couple of SUBSCRIBE calls. > E.g. a TCP packet starting with this will break the SIP connection tracking: > > INVITE,NOTIFY,OPTIONS,REFER,REGISTER,UPDATE,SUBSCRIBE > Content-Length: 0 Ugh. I guess it makes sense to detect this and then accept for this case too. > The previous TCP packet was accepted by SIP connection tracking > because it had no Content-Length field. Perhaps we should treat Content-length of 0 like "no Conent-Length field".