From: Vlad Yasevich <vyasevich@gmail.com>
To: Chang <changxiangzhong@gmail.com>, Neil Horman <nhorman@tuxdriver.com>
Cc: davem@davemloft.net, linux-sctp@vger.kernel.org,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
dreibh@simula.no, ernstgr@simula.no
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: sctp: recover a tranport when an ack comes
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2013 20:35:14 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <52868582.2020509@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <52867D2E.2090907@gmail.com>
On 11/15/2013 02:59 PM, Chang wrote:
> I've tried to catch you guys up~
>
> Here's a quick question:
>
> Where are the default [transport->pf_retrans] and
> [transport->pathmaxrtx] set?
They are initially set through the sctp_net_init. Later
they can be changed through sysctl or via socket options.
> I could figure out that they could be set
> through setsockopt(SCTP_PEER_ADDR_THLDS, ...) (but it seems like the
> SCTP library has not supported such option yet, maybe that's due to my
> library is out of date). So by default both of the two threshold are zero.
pf_retrans starts at 0. pathmaxrtx has always started at 5.
You should be able to use the socket option directly, but you might need
a newer header. You can always add the value to your application as well.
>
> Here's my question: Does it go conflict with "the recommended value for
> Path.Max.Retrans in the standard is 5"?
Path.Max.Retrans is set to 5 (at least on my system...)
-vlad
>
> Thanks!
>
> On 11/15/2013 03:56 PM, Neil Horman wrote:
>> On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 09:00:58AM -0500, Vlad Yasevich wrote:
>>> On 11/15/2013 07:30 AM, Neil Horman wrote:
>>>> On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 09:34:55PM -0500, Vlad Yasevich wrote:
>>>>> On 11/14/2013 03:40 PM, Chang Xiangzhong wrote:
>>>>>> Expected Behavior:
>>>>>> When hearing an ack from a tranport/path, set its state to
>>>>>> normal/on if it's
>>>>>> in abnormal(__partial_failure__ or inactive) state.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> state machine of tranport->state
>>>>>> Whenever a T3_RTX timer expires, then transport->error_count++.
>>>>>> When (association->pf_retrans < transport->error_count <
>>>>>> tranport->pathmaxrtx)
>>>>>> transport->state = SCTP_PF //partial failure
>>>>>>
>>>>>> When a heartbeat-ack comes or conventional ack acknowledged its
>>>>>> availability,
>>>>>> transport->state = SCTP_ON
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Chang Xiangzhong <changxiangzhong@gmail.com>
>>>>>> Fixes: 5aa93bcf66f ("sctp: Implement quick failover draft from
>>>>>> tsvwg")
>>>>> I don't think this is right. The spec states:
>>>>> 8. ACKs for retransmissions do not transition a PF destination back
>>>>> to Active state, since a sender cannot disambiguate whether
>>>>> the
>>>>> ack was for the original transmission or the
>>>>> retransmission(s).
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Now, the proper way to this would would be modify
>>>>> sctp_assoc_control_transport() to transition the transport state to
>>>>> ACTIVE if it was PF transport that was chosen to send data.
>>>>>
>>>>> -vlad
>>>>>
>>>> I agree, this patch doesn't agree with the spec, the only time we
>>>> transition
>>> >from PF to ACTIVE should be on receipt of ack of new data.
>>>
>>> You mean HB ACK, right? The 02 spec that see on the ietf site doesn't
>>> mention anything about transition on SACKs. Also, there is no way to
>>> tell right now if the ack is for new or retransmitted data. We could
>>> mark chunks that are retransmitted though.
>>>
>> Yes, sorry I wasn't clear, I was speaknig about HB Acks.
>>
>>>> I'm not even sure if
>>>> we should allow PF transports to be selected to send new data.
>>>> Currently a
>>>> potentially failed transport will get ignored when specified, and
>>>> the stack will
>>>> use the active path in its place. Only if all transports are PF
>>>> will a PF
>>>> transport be chosen.
>>> Not even that :(. If all transports are PF, we are going to camp on
>>> the primary path instead of choosing a PF transport with the lowest
>>> error count.
>>>
>> Yes, we don't do the smallest error count check, though I have to
>> wonder if
>> thats really worthwhile. If all your transports are PF, you're a step
>> away from
>> a connection reset anyway.
>> Neil
>>
>>> -vlad
>>>
>>>> Neil
>>>>
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>> net/sctp/outqueue.c | 1 +
>>>>>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> diff --git a/net/sctp/outqueue.c b/net/sctp/outqueue.c
>>>>>> index 94df758..2557fa5 100644
>>>>>> --- a/net/sctp/outqueue.c
>>>>>> +++ b/net/sctp/outqueue.c
>>>>>> @@ -1517,6 +1517,7 @@ static void sctp_check_transmitted(struct
>>>>>> sctp_outq *q,
>>>>>> * active if it is not so marked.
>>>>>> */
>>>>>> if ((transport->state = SCTP_INACTIVE ||
>>>>>> + transport->state = SCTP_PF ||
>>>>>> transport->state = SCTP_UNCONFIRMED) &&
>>>>>> sctp_cmp_addr_exact(&transport->ipaddr, saddr)) {
>>>>>> sctp_assoc_control_transport(
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>> --
>>> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-sctp" in
>>> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
>>> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>>>
>
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Vlad Yasevich <vyasevich@gmail.com>
To: Chang <changxiangzhong@gmail.com>, Neil Horman <nhorman@tuxdriver.com>
Cc: davem@davemloft.net, linux-sctp@vger.kernel.org,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
dreibh@simula.no, ernstgr@simula.no
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: sctp: recover a tranport when an ack comes
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2013 15:35:14 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <52868582.2020509@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <52867D2E.2090907@gmail.com>
On 11/15/2013 02:59 PM, Chang wrote:
> I've tried to catch you guys up~
>
> Here's a quick question:
>
> Where are the default [transport->pf_retrans] and
> [transport->pathmaxrtx] set?
They are initially set through the sctp_net_init. Later
they can be changed through sysctl or via socket options.
> I could figure out that they could be set
> through setsockopt(SCTP_PEER_ADDR_THLDS, ...) (but it seems like the
> SCTP library has not supported such option yet, maybe that's due to my
> library is out of date). So by default both of the two threshold are zero.
pf_retrans starts at 0. pathmaxrtx has always started at 5.
You should be able to use the socket option directly, but you might need
a newer header. You can always add the value to your application as well.
>
> Here's my question: Does it go conflict with "the recommended value for
> Path.Max.Retrans in the standard is 5"?
Path.Max.Retrans is set to 5 (at least on my system...)
-vlad
>
> Thanks!
>
> On 11/15/2013 03:56 PM, Neil Horman wrote:
>> On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 09:00:58AM -0500, Vlad Yasevich wrote:
>>> On 11/15/2013 07:30 AM, Neil Horman wrote:
>>>> On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 09:34:55PM -0500, Vlad Yasevich wrote:
>>>>> On 11/14/2013 03:40 PM, Chang Xiangzhong wrote:
>>>>>> Expected Behavior:
>>>>>> When hearing an ack from a tranport/path, set its state to
>>>>>> normal/on if it's
>>>>>> in abnormal(__partial_failure__ or inactive) state.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> state machine of tranport->state
>>>>>> Whenever a T3_RTX timer expires, then transport->error_count++.
>>>>>> When (association->pf_retrans < transport->error_count <
>>>>>> tranport->pathmaxrtx)
>>>>>> transport->state = SCTP_PF //partial failure
>>>>>>
>>>>>> When a heartbeat-ack comes or conventional ack acknowledged its
>>>>>> availability,
>>>>>> transport->state = SCTP_ON
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Chang Xiangzhong <changxiangzhong@gmail.com>
>>>>>> Fixes: 5aa93bcf66f ("sctp: Implement quick failover draft from
>>>>>> tsvwg")
>>>>> I don't think this is right. The spec states:
>>>>> 8. ACKs for retransmissions do not transition a PF destination back
>>>>> to Active state, since a sender cannot disambiguate whether
>>>>> the
>>>>> ack was for the original transmission or the
>>>>> retransmission(s).
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Now, the proper way to this would would be modify
>>>>> sctp_assoc_control_transport() to transition the transport state to
>>>>> ACTIVE if it was PF transport that was chosen to send data.
>>>>>
>>>>> -vlad
>>>>>
>>>> I agree, this patch doesn't agree with the spec, the only time we
>>>> transition
>>> >from PF to ACTIVE should be on receipt of ack of new data.
>>>
>>> You mean HB ACK, right? The 02 spec that see on the ietf site doesn't
>>> mention anything about transition on SACKs. Also, there is no way to
>>> tell right now if the ack is for new or retransmitted data. We could
>>> mark chunks that are retransmitted though.
>>>
>> Yes, sorry I wasn't clear, I was speaknig about HB Acks.
>>
>>>> I'm not even sure if
>>>> we should allow PF transports to be selected to send new data.
>>>> Currently a
>>>> potentially failed transport will get ignored when specified, and
>>>> the stack will
>>>> use the active path in its place. Only if all transports are PF
>>>> will a PF
>>>> transport be chosen.
>>> Not even that :(. If all transports are PF, we are going to camp on
>>> the primary path instead of choosing a PF transport with the lowest
>>> error count.
>>>
>> Yes, we don't do the smallest error count check, though I have to
>> wonder if
>> thats really worthwhile. If all your transports are PF, you're a step
>> away from
>> a connection reset anyway.
>> Neil
>>
>>> -vlad
>>>
>>>> Neil
>>>>
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>> net/sctp/outqueue.c | 1 +
>>>>>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> diff --git a/net/sctp/outqueue.c b/net/sctp/outqueue.c
>>>>>> index 94df758..2557fa5 100644
>>>>>> --- a/net/sctp/outqueue.c
>>>>>> +++ b/net/sctp/outqueue.c
>>>>>> @@ -1517,6 +1517,7 @@ static void sctp_check_transmitted(struct
>>>>>> sctp_outq *q,
>>>>>> * active if it is not so marked.
>>>>>> */
>>>>>> if ((transport->state == SCTP_INACTIVE ||
>>>>>> + transport->state == SCTP_PF ||
>>>>>> transport->state == SCTP_UNCONFIRMED) &&
>>>>>> sctp_cmp_addr_exact(&transport->ipaddr, saddr)) {
>>>>>> sctp_assoc_control_transport(
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>> --
>>> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-sctp" in
>>> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
>>> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>>>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-11-15 20:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-11-14 20:40 [PATCH] net: sctp: recover a tranport when an ack comes Chang Xiangzhong
2013-11-14 20:40 ` Chang Xiangzhong
2013-11-15 2:34 ` Vlad Yasevich
2013-11-15 2:34 ` Vlad Yasevich
2013-11-15 12:30 ` Neil Horman
2013-11-15 12:30 ` Neil Horman
2013-11-15 14:00 ` Vlad Yasevich
2013-11-15 14:00 ` Vlad Yasevich
2013-11-15 14:56 ` Neil Horman
2013-11-15 14:56 ` Neil Horman
2013-11-15 19:59 ` Chang
2013-11-15 19:59 ` Chang
2013-11-15 20:25 ` Neil Horman
2013-11-15 20:25 ` Neil Horman
2013-11-15 20:35 ` Vlad Yasevich [this message]
2013-11-15 20:35 ` Vlad Yasevich
2013-11-15 20:38 ` Chang
2013-11-15 20:38 ` Chang
2013-11-15 22:04 ` Chang
2013-11-15 22:04 ` Chang
2013-11-15 22:48 ` Vlad Yasevich
2013-11-15 22:48 ` Vlad Yasevich
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=52868582.2020509@gmail.com \
--to=vyasevich@gmail.com \
--cc=changxiangzhong@gmail.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=dreibh@simula.no \
--cc=ernstgr@simula.no \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-sctp@vger.kernel.org \
--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.