* Re: SCTP heartbeat transmission interval in not working as expected
2015-08-17 11:45 SCTP heartbeat transmission interval in not working as expected Ravi Puttachannaiah
@ 2015-08-17 13:12 ` Michael Tuexen
2015-08-17 13:45 ` Ravi Puttachannaiah
` (10 subsequent siblings)
11 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: Michael Tuexen @ 2015-08-17 13:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-sctp
> On 17 Aug 2015, at 13:45, Ravi Puttachannaiah <ravi.puttachannaiah@aricent.com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> We are using LKSCTP (ver 1.0.16) and we observe that the SCTP heartbeat transmission interval in not working as expected. Following is the SCTP configuration settings we are using (applied using setsockopt()).
>
>
> hbinterval0-sec
> RTO initial=3-sec
> RTO min=1-sec
> RTO max`-sec
>
> As per our understanding the SCTP heartbeat transmission interval value should be between 31.5 to 34.5 seconds as per the calculation "RTO+HBInterval+delta(Âą0.5ofRTO)" but we are always seeing the value in-between 30.6 to 31.5 seconds.
Assuming that the RTO is 1 second (after an RTT measurement this is true, I guess), you would get HBs every
30.5 and 31.5 seconds. Seems to be about what you measure.
Best regards
Michael
>
> Could somebody confirm if this is an issue or not and in-case of an issue how we can resolve.
>
> We are using LKSCTP version 1.0.16 and 1.0.7 and in both the versions we are observing the same behavior.
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Ravi​
>
> "DISCLAIMER: This message is proprietary to Aricent and is intended solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. It may contain privileged or confidential information and should not be circulated or used for any purpose other than for what it is intended. If you have received this message in error, please notify the originator immediately. If you are not the intended recipient, you are notified that you are strictly prohibited from using, copying, altering, or disclosing the contents of this message. Aricent accepts no responsibility for loss or damage arising from the use of the information transmitted by this email including damage from virus."
> N‹§ēæėrļ›yúčšØbēXŽķĮ§vØ^–)Þš{.nĮ+‰·ĨŠ{ąąËiŠ{ayš\x1dʇڙë,j\aĒfĢĒ·hš‹āzđ\x1eŪwĨĒļ\fĒ·Ķj:+v‰ĻŠwčjØmķŸĸū\aŦ‘ęįzZ+ƒųšŽŠÝĒj"ú!
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread* RE: SCTP heartbeat transmission interval in not working as expected
2015-08-17 11:45 SCTP heartbeat transmission interval in not working as expected Ravi Puttachannaiah
2015-08-17 13:12 ` Michael Tuexen
@ 2015-08-17 13:45 ` Ravi Puttachannaiah
2015-08-17 14:37 ` Michael Tuexen
` (9 subsequent siblings)
11 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: Ravi Puttachannaiah @ 2015-08-17 13:45 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-sctp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^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread* Re: SCTP heartbeat transmission interval in not working as expected
2015-08-17 11:45 SCTP heartbeat transmission interval in not working as expected Ravi Puttachannaiah
2015-08-17 13:12 ` Michael Tuexen
2015-08-17 13:45 ` Ravi Puttachannaiah
@ 2015-08-17 14:37 ` Michael Tuexen
2015-08-17 16:05 ` Ravi Puttachannaiah
` (8 subsequent siblings)
11 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: Michael Tuexen @ 2015-08-17 14:37 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-sctp
> On 17 Aug 2015, at 15:45, Ravi Puttachannaiah <ravi.puttachannaiah@aricent.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Michael,
>
> Thanks for your quick response. It will be helpful if you can explain why it should be 30.5 to 31.5.
>
> As per our understanding initially it should start with 33-seconds (30[HBInterval]+3[RTO initial]) right ?. Please correct me if my understanding is in-correct.
It should be [HB.Interval + 0.5 RTO, HB.Interval + 1.5 RTO]. I don't know when LKSCTP does RTT measurement, but assuming that the RTT is small,
I expect the RTO to be roughly RTO.min after the first measurement. So I was using RTO = RTO.Min
Best regards
Michael
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Ravi
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Michael Tuexen [mailto:Michael.Tuexen@lurchi.franken.de]
> Sent: Monday, August 17, 2015 6:43 PM
> To: Ravi Puttachannaiah
> Cc: linux-sctp@vger.kernel.org
> Subject: Re: SCTP heartbeat transmission interval in not working as expected
>
>> On 17 Aug 2015, at 13:45, Ravi Puttachannaiah <ravi.puttachannaiah@aricent.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> We are using LKSCTP (ver 1.0.16) and we observe that the SCTP heartbeat transmission interval in not working as expected. Following is the SCTP configuration settings we are using (applied using setsockopt()).
>>
>>
>> hbinterval0-sec
>> RTO initial=3-sec
>> RTO min=1-sec
>> RTO max`-sec
>>
>> As per our understanding the SCTP heartbeat transmission interval value should be between 31.5 to 34.5 seconds as per the calculation "RTO+HBInterval+delta(脗膮0.5ofRTO)" but we are always seeing the value in-between 30.6 to 31.5 seconds.
> Assuming that the RTO is 1 second (after an RTT measurement this is true, I guess), you would get HBs every
> 30.5 and 31.5 seconds. Seems to be about what you measure.
>
> Best regards
> Michael
>>
>> Could somebody confirm if this is an issue or not and in-case of an issue how we can resolve.
>>
>> We are using LKSCTP version 1.0.16 and 1.0.7 and in both the versions we are observing the same behavior.
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Ravi芒鈧��
>>
>> "DISCLAIMER: This message is proprietary to Aricent and is intended solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. It may contain privileged or confidential information and should not be circulated or used for any purpose other than for what it is intended. If you have received this message in error, please notify the originator immediately. If you are not the intended recipient, you are notified that you are strictly prohibited from using, copying, altering, or disclosing the contents of this message. Aricent accepts no responsibility for loss or damage arising from the use of the information transmitted by this email including damage from virus."
>> N鈥孤撁δ梤募鈥簓煤膷職脴b膿X沤姆漠搂v脴^鈥�)脼拧{.n漠+鈥奥纺妠膮膮脣i聤{ay拧�臉鈥∶氣劉毛,j
> 颅膾f蘑膾路h職鈥鼓亃膽�弄w抹膾募
> 膾路亩j:+v鈥澳宦妛膷j脴m姆聼母奴
> 纽鈥樐櫮痾Z+聝懦職藝聤脻膾j"炉煤!
>
> "DISCLAIMER: This message is proprietary to Aricent and is intended solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. It may contain privileged or confidential information and should not be circulated or used for any purpose other than for what it is intended. If you have received this message in error, please notify the originator immediately. If you are not the intended recipient, you are notified that you are strictly prohibited from using, copying, altering, or disclosing the contents of this message. Aricent accepts no responsibility for loss or damage arising from the use of the information transmitted by this email including damage from virus."
> �N嫥叉靣笡y氊b瞂千v豝�)藓{.n�+壏{北薸妠ay��蕠跈�,j�f＂穐殝鄗��畐ア�\f⒎:+v墾妛鑚豰稛���珣赙zZ+凒殠娸"濟!
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread* RE: SCTP heartbeat transmission interval in not working as expected
2015-08-17 11:45 SCTP heartbeat transmission interval in not working as expected Ravi Puttachannaiah
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2015-08-17 14:37 ` Michael Tuexen
@ 2015-08-17 16:05 ` Ravi Puttachannaiah
2015-08-17 21:37 ` Vlad Yasevich
` (7 subsequent siblings)
11 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: Ravi Puttachannaiah @ 2015-08-17 16:05 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-sctp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^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread* Re: SCTP heartbeat transmission interval in not working as expected
2015-08-17 11:45 SCTP heartbeat transmission interval in not working as expected Ravi Puttachannaiah
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2015-08-17 16:05 ` Ravi Puttachannaiah
@ 2015-08-17 21:37 ` Vlad Yasevich
2015-08-17 23:06 ` malc
` (6 subsequent siblings)
11 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: Vlad Yasevich @ 2015-08-17 21:37 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-sctp
On 08/17/2015 06:45 AM, Ravi Puttachannaiah wrote:
> Hi Michael,
>
> Thanks for your quick response. It will be helpful if you can explain why it should be 30.5 to 31.5.
>
> As per our understanding initially it should start with 33-seconds (30[HBInterval]+3[RTO initial]) right ?. Please correct me if my understanding is in-correct.
>
>
So this is what the SCTP spec actually states:
On an idle destination address that is allowed to heartbeat, it is
recommended that a HEARTBEAT chunk is sent once per RTO of that
destination address plus the protocol parameterh 'HB.interval', with
jittering of +/- 50% of the RTO value, and exponential backoff of the
RTO if the previous HEARTBEAT is unanswered.
I can see how this could be interpreted as RTO + HB.Interval +/- 50% RTO,
but that's not what should actually happen.
The basis of the algorithm is that packet is sent once per RTO with an RTO
jittering of %50. So, for the RTO of X, the base "once per RTO" transmission
is .5X - 1.5X. Then you add to this the HB.Interval value.
For your RTO values, with an RTO.min of 1sec, your RTO will most likely be clamped
at 1 sec (unless you really have very long RTO values).
This means that for HBs, your base RTO will vary between 0.5-1.5 sec.
This should explain what you are actually seeing on the wire.
-vlad
> Regards,
>
> Ravi
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Michael Tuexen [mailto:Michael.Tuexen@lurchi.franken.de]
> Sent: Monday, August 17, 2015 6:43 PM
> To: Ravi Puttachannaiah
> Cc: linux-sctp@vger.kernel.org
> Subject: Re: SCTP heartbeat transmission interval in not working as expected
>
>> On 17 Aug 2015, at 13:45, Ravi Puttachannaiah <ravi.puttachannaiah@aricent.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> We are using LKSCTP (ver 1.0.16) and we observe that the SCTP heartbeat transmission interval in not working as expected. Following is the SCTP configuration settings we are using (applied using setsockopt()).
>>
>>
>> hbinterval0-sec
>> RTO initial=3-sec
>> RTO min=1-sec
>> RTO max`-sec
>>
>> As per our understanding the SCTP heartbeat transmission interval value should be between 31.5 to 34.5 seconds as per the calculation "RTO+HBInterval+delta(Âą0.5ofRTO)" but we are always seeing the value in-between 30.6 to 31.5 seconds.
> Assuming that the RTO is 1 second (after an RTT measurement this is true, I guess), you would get HBs every
> 30.5 and 31.5 seconds. Seems to be about what you measure.
>
> Best regards
> Michael
>>
>> Could somebody confirm if this is an issue or not and in-case of an issue how we can resolve.
>>
>> We are using LKSCTP version 1.0.16 and 1.0.7 and in both the versions we are observing the same behavior.
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Ravi​
>>
>> "DISCLAIMER: This message is proprietary to Aricent and is intended solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. It may contain privileged or confidential information and should not be circulated or used for any purpose other than for what it is intended. If you have received this message in error, please notify the originator immediately. If you are not the intended recipient, you are notified that you are strictly prohibited from using, copying, altering, or disclosing the contents of this message. Aricent accepts no responsibility for loss or damage arising from the use of the information transmitted by this email including damage from virus."
>> N‹§ēæėrļ›yúčšØbēXŽķĮ§vØ^–)Þš{.nĮ+‰·ĨŠ{ąąËiŠ{ayš\x1dʇڙë,j
> ĒfĢĒ·hš‹āzđ\x1eŪwĨĒļ
> Ē·Ķj:+v‰ĻŠwčjØmķŸĸū
> Ŧ‘ęįzZ+ƒųšˇŠÝĒj"¯ú!
>
> "DISCLAIMER: This message is proprietary to Aricent and is intended solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. It may contain privileged or confidential information and should not be circulated or used for any purpose other than for what it is intended. If you have received this message in error, please notify the originator immediately. If you are not the intended recipient, you are notified that you are strictly prohibited from using, copying, altering, or disclosing the contents of this message. Aricent accepts no responsibility for loss or damage arising from the use of the information transmitted by this email including damage from virus."
> N�����r��y���b�X��ǧv�^�){.n�+����{���i�{ay�\x1dʇڙ�,j\a��f���h���z�\x1e�w���\f���j:+v���w�j�m����\a����zZ+�����ݢj"��!tml>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread* Re: SCTP heartbeat transmission interval in not working as expected
2015-08-17 11:45 SCTP heartbeat transmission interval in not working as expected Ravi Puttachannaiah
` (4 preceding siblings ...)
2015-08-17 21:37 ` Vlad Yasevich
@ 2015-08-17 23:06 ` malc
2015-08-18 5:42 ` Ravi Puttachannaiah
` (5 subsequent siblings)
11 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: malc @ 2015-08-17 23:06 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-sctp
Hey Vlad, Ravi,
Pretty sure the initial confusion was around the first HB apparently
not using HB.Interval + RTO.*Init* (=3s in the given scenario) +/-
50%. (I sent a message suggesting that this would not be the case if
DATA/SACK had been exchanged causing an RTT calculation before the HB
timer was started, but forgot to set plaintext so vger bounced me...)
I am pretty sure this can happen if we bundle DATA with COOKIE ECHO,
wasn't sure if we do an RTO calc for any of the initial handshake
/without/ DATA being exchanged (spec doesn't say to afaik, but it
doesn't say not to either...)
If Ravi can share wireshark traces - I guess it will make it most
obvious exactly which scenario he is seeing. I can tell you that last
time I tested with a 3rd party conformance tool (Testing Tech), albeit
a while ago now - this was all working as I understood it should.
Cheers,
malc.
On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 10:37 PM, Vlad Yasevich <vyasevich@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 08/17/2015 06:45 AM, Ravi Puttachannaiah wrote:
>> Hi Michael,
>>
>> Thanks for your quick response. It will be helpful if you can explain why it should be 30.5 to 31.5.
>>
>> As per our understanding initially it should start with 33-seconds (30[HBInterval]+3[RTO initial]) right ?. Please correct me if my understanding is in-correct.
>>
>>
>
> So this is what the SCTP spec actually states:
>
> On an idle destination address that is allowed to heartbeat, it is
> recommended that a HEARTBEAT chunk is sent once per RTO of that
> destination address plus the protocol parameterh 'HB.interval', with
> jittering of +/- 50% of the RTO value, and exponential backoff of the
> RTO if the previous HEARTBEAT is unanswered.
>
>
> I can see how this could be interpreted as RTO + HB.Interval +/- 50% RTO,
> but that's not what should actually happen.
>
> The basis of the algorithm is that packet is sent once per RTO with an RTO
> jittering of %50. So, for the RTO of X, the base "once per RTO" transmission
> is .5X - 1.5X. Then you add to this the HB.Interval value.
>
> For your RTO values, with an RTO.min of 1sec, your RTO will most likely be clamped
> at 1 sec (unless you really have very long RTO values).
> This means that for HBs, your base RTO will vary between 0.5-1.5 sec.
>
> This should explain what you are actually seeing on the wire.
>
> -vlad
>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Ravi
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Michael Tuexen [mailto:Michael.Tuexen@lurchi.franken.de]
>> Sent: Monday, August 17, 2015 6:43 PM
>> To: Ravi Puttachannaiah
>> Cc: linux-sctp@vger.kernel.org
>> Subject: Re: SCTP heartbeat transmission interval in not working as expected
>>
>>> On 17 Aug 2015, at 13:45, Ravi Puttachannaiah <ravi.puttachannaiah@aricent.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> We are using LKSCTP (ver 1.0.16) and we observe that the SCTP heartbeat transmission interval in not working as expected. Following is the SCTP configuration settings we are using (applied using setsockopt()).
>>>
>>>
>>> hbinterval0-sec
>>> RTO initial=3-sec
>>> RTO min=1-sec
>>> RTO max`-sec
>>>
>>> As per our understanding the SCTP heartbeat transmission interval value should be between 31.5 to 34.5 seconds as per the calculation "RTO+HBInterval+delta(Âą0.5ofRTO)" but we are always seeing the value in-between 30.6 to 31.5 seconds.
>> Assuming that the RTO is 1 second (after an RTT measurement this is true, I guess), you would get HBs every
>> 30.5 and 31.5 seconds. Seems to be about what you measure.
>>
>> Best regards
>> Michael
>>>
>>> Could somebody confirm if this is an issue or not and in-case of an issue how we can resolve.
>>>
>>> We are using LKSCTP version 1.0.16 and 1.0.7 and in both the versions we are observing the same behavior.
>>>
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Ravi​
>>>
>>> "DISCLAIMER: This message is proprietary to Aricent and is intended solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. It may contain privileged or confidential information and should not be circulated or used for any purpose other than for what it is intended. If you have received this message in error, please notify the originator immediately. If you are not the intended recipient, you are notified that you are strictly prohibited from using, copying, altering, or disclosing the contents of this message. Aricent accepts no responsibility for loss or damage arising from the use of the information transmitted by this email including damage from virus."
>>> N‹§ēæėrļ›yúčšØbēXŽķĮ§vØ^–)Þš{.nĮ+‰·ĨŠ{ąąËiŠ{ayš ʇڙë,j
>> ĒfĢĒ·hš‹āzđ ŪwĨĒļ
>> Ē·Ķj:+v‰ĻŠwčjØmķŸĸū
>> Ŧ‘ęįzZ+ƒųšˇŠÝĒj"¯ú!
>>
>> "DISCLAIMER: This message is proprietary to Aricent and is intended solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. It may contain privileged or confidential information and should not be circulated or used for any purpose other than for what it is intended. If you have received this message in error, please notify the originator immediately. If you are not the intended recipient, you are notified that you are strictly prohibited from using, copying, altering, or disclosing the contents of this message. Aricent accepts no responsibility for loss or damage arising from the use of the information transmitted by this email including damage from virus."
>> N�����r��y���b�X��ǧv�^�){.n�+����{���i�{ay� ʇڙ�,j ��f���h���z� �w��� ���j:+v���w�j�m���� ����zZ+�����ݢj"��!tml>>
>
> --
> 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
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread* RE: SCTP heartbeat transmission interval in not working as expected
2015-08-17 11:45 SCTP heartbeat transmission interval in not working as expected Ravi Puttachannaiah
` (5 preceding siblings ...)
2015-08-17 23:06 ` malc
@ 2015-08-18 5:42 ` Ravi Puttachannaiah
2015-08-18 15:35 ` Vlad Yasevich
` (4 subsequent siblings)
11 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: Ravi Puttachannaiah @ 2015-08-18 5:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-sctp
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 7175 bytes --]
Hi Malc,
I have attached the wireshark traces. Could you please check and help.
Please check the SCTP messages between 172.21.1.82(SRC) and 172.21.1.5(DST).
Regards,
Ravi
-----Original Message-----
From: linux-sctp-owner@vger.kernel.org [mailto:linux-sctp-owner@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of malc
Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2015 4:36 AM
To: linux-sctp@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: SCTP heartbeat transmission interval in not working as expected
Hey Vlad, Ravi,
Pretty sure the initial confusion was around the first HB apparently not using HB.Interval + RTO.*Init* (=3s in the given scenario) +/- 50%. (I sent a message suggesting that this would not be the case if DATA/SACK had been exchanged causing an RTT calculation before the HB timer was started, but forgot to set plaintext so vger bounced me...) I am pretty sure this can happen if we bundle DATA with COOKIE ECHO, wasn't sure if we do an RTO calc for any of the initial handshake /without/ DATA being exchanged (spec doesn't say to afaik, but it doesn't say not to either...)
If Ravi can share wireshark traces - I guess it will make it most obvious exactly which scenario he is seeing. I can tell you that last time I tested with a 3rd party conformance tool (Testing Tech), albeit a while ago now - this was all working as I understood it should.
Cheers,
malc.
On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 10:37 PM, Vlad Yasevich <vyasevich@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 08/17/2015 06:45 AM, Ravi Puttachannaiah wrote:
>> Hi Michael,
>>
>> Thanks for your quick response. It will be helpful if you can explain why it should be 30.5 to 31.5.
>>
>> As per our understanding initially it should start with 33-seconds (30[HBInterval]+3[RTO initial]) right ?. Please correct me if my understanding is in-correct.
>>
>>
>
> So this is what the SCTP spec actually states:
>
> On an idle destination address that is allowed to heartbeat, it is
> recommended that a HEARTBEAT chunk is sent once per RTO of that
> destination address plus the protocol parameterh 'HB.interval', with
> jittering of +/- 50% of the RTO value, and exponential backoff of the
> RTO if the previous HEARTBEAT is unanswered.
>
>
> I can see how this could be interpreted as RTO + HB.Interval +/- 50%
> RTO, but that's not what should actually happen.
>
> The basis of the algorithm is that packet is sent once per RTO with an
> RTO jittering of %50. So, for the RTO of X, the base "once per RTO"
> transmission is .5X - 1.5X. Then you add to this the HB.Interval value.
>
> For your RTO values, with an RTO.min of 1sec, your RTO will most
> likely be clamped at 1 sec (unless you really have very long RTO values).
> This means that for HBs, your base RTO will vary between 0.5-1.5 sec.
>
> This should explain what you are actually seeing on the wire.
>
> -vlad
>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Ravi
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Michael Tuexen [mailto:Michael.Tuexen@lurchi.franken.de]
>> Sent: Monday, August 17, 2015 6:43 PM
>> To: Ravi Puttachannaiah
>> Cc: linux-sctp@vger.kernel.org
>> Subject: Re: SCTP heartbeat transmission interval in not working as
>> expected
>>
>>> On 17 Aug 2015, at 13:45, Ravi Puttachannaiah <ravi.puttachannaiah@aricent.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> We are using LKSCTP (ver 1.0.16) and we observe that the SCTP heartbeat transmission interval in not working as expected. Following is the SCTP configuration settings we are using (applied using setsockopt()).
>>>
>>>
>>> hbinterval=30-sec
>>> RTO initial=3-sec
>>> RTO min=1-sec
>>> RTO max=60-sec
>>>
>>> As per our understanding the SCTP heartbeat transmission interval value should be between 31.5 to 34.5 seconds as per the calculation "RTO+HBInterval+delta(Âą0.5ofRTO)" but we are always seeing the value in-between 30.6 to 31.5 seconds.
>> Assuming that the RTO is 1 second (after an RTT measurement this is
>> true, I guess), you would get HBs every
>> 30.5 and 31.5 seconds. Seems to be about what you measure.
>>
>> Best regards
>> Michael
>>>
>>> Could somebody confirm if this is an issue or not and in-case of an issue how we can resolve.
>>>
>>> We are using LKSCTP version 1.0.16 and 1.0.7 and in both the versions we are observing the same behavior.
>>>
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Ravi​
>>>
>>> "DISCLAIMER: This message is proprietary to Aricent and is intended solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. It may contain privileged or confidential information and should not be circulated or used for any purpose other than for what it is intended. If you have received this message in error, please notify the originator immediately. If you are not the intended recipient, you are notified that you are strictly prohibited from using, copying, altering, or disclosing the contents of this message. Aricent accepts no responsibility for loss or damage arising from the use of the information transmitted by this email including damage from virus."
>>> N‹§ēæėrļ›yúčšØbēXŽķĮ§vØ^–)Þš{.nĮ+‰·ĨŠ{ąąËiŠ{ayš ʇڙë,j
>> ĒfĢĒ·hš‹āzđ ŪwĨĒļ
>> Ē·Ķj:+v‰ĻŠwčjØmķŸĸū
>> Ŧ‘ęįzZ+ƒųšˇŠÝĒj"¯ú!
>>
>> "DISCLAIMER: This message is proprietary to Aricent and is intended solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. It may contain privileged or confidential information and should not be circulated or used for any purpose other than for what it is intended. If you have received this message in error, please notify the originator immediately. If you are not the intended recipient, you are notified that you are strictly prohibited from using, copying, altering, or disclosing the contents of this message. Aricent accepts no responsibility for loss or damage arising from the use of the information transmitted by this email including damage from virus."
>> N r y b X ǧv ^ ){.n + { i {ay ʇڙ ,j f h z w
>> j:+v w j m zZ+ ݢj" !tml=
>>
>
> --
> 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
--
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
"DISCLAIMER: This message is proprietary to Aricent and is intended solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. It may contain privileged or confidential information and should not be circulated or used for any purpose other than for what it is intended. If you have received this message in error, please notify the originator immediately. If you are not the intended recipient, you are notified that you are strictly prohibited from using, copying, altering, or disclosing the contents of this message. Aricent accepts no responsibility for loss or damage arising from the use of the information transmitted by this email including damage from virus."
[-- Attachment #2: sctp_hb_retransmission.pcapng --]
[-- Type: application/octet-stream, Size: 11656 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread* Re: SCTP heartbeat transmission interval in not working as expected
2015-08-17 11:45 SCTP heartbeat transmission interval in not working as expected Ravi Puttachannaiah
` (6 preceding siblings ...)
2015-08-18 5:42 ` Ravi Puttachannaiah
@ 2015-08-18 15:35 ` Vlad Yasevich
2015-08-18 17:17 ` malc
` (3 subsequent siblings)
11 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: Vlad Yasevich @ 2015-08-18 15:35 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-sctp
On 08/17/2015 04:06 PM, malc wrote:
> Hey Vlad, Ravi,
>
> Pretty sure the initial confusion was around the first HB apparently
> not using HB.Interval + RTO.*Init* (=3s in the given scenario) +/-
> 50%. (I sent a message suggesting that this would not be the case if
> DATA/SACK had been exchanged causing an RTT calculation before the HB
> timer was started, but forgot to set plaintext so vger bounced me...)
> I am pretty sure this can happen if we bundle DATA with COOKIE ECHO,
> wasn't sure if we do an RTO calc for any of the initial handshake
> /without/ DATA being exchanged (spec doesn't say to afaik, but it
> doesn't say not to either...)
First HB on a non-primary path will be within an RTO without HB.Interval
as it would be a path confirmation probe HB. Until the path is confirmed,
HBs are sent based on RTO only. Once the path is confirmed, HB.Interval
takes effect.
-vlad
>
> If Ravi can share wireshark traces - I guess it will make it most
> obvious exactly which scenario he is seeing. I can tell you that last
> time I tested with a 3rd party conformance tool (Testing Tech), albeit
> a while ago now - this was all working as I understood it should.
>
> Cheers,
> malc.
>
> On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 10:37 PM, Vlad Yasevich <vyasevich@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 08/17/2015 06:45 AM, Ravi Puttachannaiah wrote:
>>> Hi Michael,
>>>
>>> Thanks for your quick response. It will be helpful if you can explain why it should be 30.5 to 31.5.
>>>
>>> As per our understanding initially it should start with 33-seconds (30[HBInterval]+3[RTO initial]) right ?. Please correct me if my understanding is in-correct.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> So this is what the SCTP spec actually states:
>>
>> On an idle destination address that is allowed to heartbeat, it is
>> recommended that a HEARTBEAT chunk is sent once per RTO of that
>> destination address plus the protocol parameterh 'HB.interval', with
>> jittering of +/- 50% of the RTO value, and exponential backoff of the
>> RTO if the previous HEARTBEAT is unanswered.
>>
>>
>> I can see how this could be interpreted as RTO + HB.Interval +/- 50% RTO,
>> but that's not what should actually happen.
>>
>> The basis of the algorithm is that packet is sent once per RTO with an RTO
>> jittering of %50. So, for the RTO of X, the base "once per RTO" transmission
>> is .5X - 1.5X. Then you add to this the HB.Interval value.
>>
>> For your RTO values, with an RTO.min of 1sec, your RTO will most likely be clamped
>> at 1 sec (unless you really have very long RTO values).
>> This means that for HBs, your base RTO will vary between 0.5-1.5 sec.
>>
>> This should explain what you are actually seeing on the wire.
>>
>> -vlad
>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Ravi
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Michael Tuexen [mailto:Michael.Tuexen@lurchi.franken.de]
>>> Sent: Monday, August 17, 2015 6:43 PM
>>> To: Ravi Puttachannaiah
>>> Cc: linux-sctp@vger.kernel.org
>>> Subject: Re: SCTP heartbeat transmission interval in not working as expected
>>>
>>>> On 17 Aug 2015, at 13:45, Ravi Puttachannaiah <ravi.puttachannaiah@aricent.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> We are using LKSCTP (ver 1.0.16) and we observe that the SCTP heartbeat transmission interval in not working as expected. Following is the SCTP configuration settings we are using (applied using setsockopt()).
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> hbinterval0-sec
>>>> RTO initial=3-sec
>>>> RTO min=1-sec
>>>> RTO max`-sec
>>>>
>>>> As per our understanding the SCTP heartbeat transmission interval value should be between 31.5 to 34.5 seconds as per the calculation "RTO+HBInterval+delta(Âą0.5ofRTO)" but we are always seeing the value in-between 30.6 to 31.5 seconds.
>>> Assuming that the RTO is 1 second (after an RTT measurement this is true, I guess), you would get HBs every
>>> 30.5 and 31.5 seconds. Seems to be about what you measure.
>>>
>>> Best regards
>>> Michael
>>>>
>>>> Could somebody confirm if this is an issue or not and in-case of an issue how we can resolve.
>>>>
>>>> We are using LKSCTP version 1.0.16 and 1.0.7 and in both the versions we are observing the same behavior.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>>
>>>> Ravi​
>>>>
>>>> "DISCLAIMER: This message is proprietary to Aricent and is intended solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. It may contain privileged or confidential information and should not be circulated or used for any purpose other than for what it is intended. If you have received this message in error, please notify the originator immediately. If you are not the intended recipient, you are notified that you are strictly prohibited from using, copying, altering, or disclosing the contents of this message. Aricent accepts no responsibility for loss or damage arising from the use of the information transmitted by this email including damage from virus."
>>>> N‹§ēæėrļ›yúčšØbēXŽķĮ§vØ^–)Þš{.nĮ+‰·ĨŠ{ąąËiŠ{ayš ʇڙë,j
>>> ĒfĢĒ·hš‹āzđ ŪwĨĒļ
>>> Ē·Ķj:+v‰ĻŠwčjØmķŸĸū
>>> Ŧ‘ęįzZ+ƒųšˇŠÝĒj"¯ú!
>>>
>>> "DISCLAIMER: This message is proprietary to Aricent and is intended solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. It may contain privileged or confidential information and should not be circulated or used for any purpose other than for what it is intended. If you have received this message in error, please notify the originator immediately. If you are not the intended recipient, you are notified that you are strictly prohibited from using, copying, altering, or disclosing the contents of this message. Aricent accepts no responsibility for loss or damage arising from the use of the information transmitted by this email including damage from virus."
>>> N�����r��y���b�X��ǧv�^�){.n�+����{���i�{ay� ʇڙ�,j ��f���h���z� �w��� ���j:+v���w�j�m���� ����zZ+�����ݢj"��!tml>>>
>>
>> --
>> 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
> --
> 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
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread* Re: SCTP heartbeat transmission interval in not working as expected
2015-08-17 11:45 SCTP heartbeat transmission interval in not working as expected Ravi Puttachannaiah
` (7 preceding siblings ...)
2015-08-18 15:35 ` Vlad Yasevich
@ 2015-08-18 17:17 ` malc
2015-08-19 5:37 ` Ravi Puttachannaiah
` (2 subsequent siblings)
11 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: malc @ 2015-08-18 17:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-sctp
@Vlad - he only has single-homed here per the trace he sent (which the
list presumably filtered.)
@Ravi - are you inducing impairments in the network? Reason I ask is
in the trace, your association comes up and then .82 sends data chunks
in frames 5 and 6 - the response from .5 (frame 7) is a GAP-SACK for
the TSN in frame 6, indicating the DATA chunk in frame 5 was lost
somehow... If you have network impairments (either intentionally, or
otherwise) - then our best-case suggestions above will be off as you
will likely incur RTO doubling etc. For the random sampling of idle HB
intervals I looked at later in the trace (initiated by .82), they all
seem to fit the expected range as described above.
Cheers,
malc.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread* RE: SCTP heartbeat transmission interval in not working as expected
2015-08-17 11:45 SCTP heartbeat transmission interval in not working as expected Ravi Puttachannaiah
` (8 preceding siblings ...)
2015-08-18 17:17 ` malc
@ 2015-08-19 5:37 ` Ravi Puttachannaiah
2015-08-19 17:25 ` Vlad Yasevich
2015-08-20 14:30 ` Ravi Puttachannaiah
11 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: Ravi Puttachannaiah @ 2015-08-19 5:37 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-sctp
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 7761 bytes --]
Hi Malc,
Did you get a chance to check the wireshark traces I shared ?. Could you please help.
Regards,
Ravi
-----Original Message-----
From: linux-sctp-owner@vger.kernel.org [mailto:linux-sctp-owner@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Vlad Yasevich
Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2015 9:05 PM
To: malc; linux-sctp@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: SCTP heartbeat transmission interval in not working as expected
On 08/17/2015 04:06 PM, malc wrote:
> Hey Vlad, Ravi,
>
> Pretty sure the initial confusion was around the first HB apparently
> not using HB.Interval + RTO.*Init* (=3s in the given scenario) +/-
> 50%. (I sent a message suggesting that this would not be the case if
> DATA/SACK had been exchanged causing an RTT calculation before the HB
> timer was started, but forgot to set plaintext so vger bounced me...)
> I am pretty sure this can happen if we bundle DATA with COOKIE ECHO,
> wasn't sure if we do an RTO calc for any of the initial handshake
> /without/ DATA being exchanged (spec doesn't say to afaik, but it
> doesn't say not to either...)
First HB on a non-primary path will be within an RTO without HB.Interval as it would be a path confirmation probe HB. Until the path is confirmed, HBs are sent based on RTO only. Once the path is confirmed, HB.Interval takes effect.
-vlad
>
> If Ravi can share wireshark traces - I guess it will make it most
> obvious exactly which scenario he is seeing. I can tell you that last
> time I tested with a 3rd party conformance tool (Testing Tech), albeit
> a while ago now - this was all working as I understood it should.
>
> Cheers,
> malc.
>
> On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 10:37 PM, Vlad Yasevich <vyasevich@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 08/17/2015 06:45 AM, Ravi Puttachannaiah wrote:
>>> Hi Michael,
>>>
>>> Thanks for your quick response. It will be helpful if you can explain why it should be 30.5 to 31.5.
>>>
>>> As per our understanding initially it should start with 33-seconds (30[HBInterval]+3[RTO initial]) right ?. Please correct me if my understanding is in-correct.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> So this is what the SCTP spec actually states:
>>
>> On an idle destination address that is allowed to heartbeat, it is
>> recommended that a HEARTBEAT chunk is sent once per RTO of that
>> destination address plus the protocol parameterh 'HB.interval', with
>> jittering of +/- 50% of the RTO value, and exponential backoff of the
>> RTO if the previous HEARTBEAT is unanswered.
>>
>>
>> I can see how this could be interpreted as RTO + HB.Interval +/- 50%
>> RTO, but that's not what should actually happen.
>>
>> The basis of the algorithm is that packet is sent once per RTO with
>> an RTO jittering of %50. So, for the RTO of X, the base "once per
>> RTO" transmission is .5X - 1.5X. Then you add to this the HB.Interval value.
>>
>> For your RTO values, with an RTO.min of 1sec, your RTO will most
>> likely be clamped at 1 sec (unless you really have very long RTO values).
>> This means that for HBs, your base RTO will vary between 0.5-1.5 sec.
>>
>> This should explain what you are actually seeing on the wire.
>>
>> -vlad
>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Ravi
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Michael Tuexen [mailto:Michael.Tuexen@lurchi.franken.de]
>>> Sent: Monday, August 17, 2015 6:43 PM
>>> To: Ravi Puttachannaiah
>>> Cc: linux-sctp@vger.kernel.org
>>> Subject: Re: SCTP heartbeat transmission interval in not working as
>>> expected
>>>
>>>> On 17 Aug 2015, at 13:45, Ravi Puttachannaiah <ravi.puttachannaiah@aricent.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> We are using LKSCTP (ver 1.0.16) and we observe that the SCTP heartbeat transmission interval in not working as expected. Following is the SCTP configuration settings we are using (applied using setsockopt()).
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> hbinterval=30-sec
>>>> RTO initial=3-sec
>>>> RTO min=1-sec
>>>> RTO max=60-sec
>>>>
>>>> As per our understanding the SCTP heartbeat transmission interval value should be between 31.5 to 34.5 seconds as per the calculation "RTO+HBInterval+delta(Âą0.5ofRTO)" but we are always seeing the value in-between 30.6 to 31.5 seconds.
>>> Assuming that the RTO is 1 second (after an RTT measurement this is
>>> true, I guess), you would get HBs every
>>> 30.5 and 31.5 seconds. Seems to be about what you measure.
>>>
>>> Best regards
>>> Michael
>>>>
>>>> Could somebody confirm if this is an issue or not and in-case of an issue how we can resolve.
>>>>
>>>> We are using LKSCTP version 1.0.16 and 1.0.7 and in both the versions we are observing the same behavior.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>>
>>>> Ravi​
>>>>
>>>> "DISCLAIMER: This message is proprietary to Aricent and is intended solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. It may contain privileged or confidential information and should not be circulated or used for any purpose other than for what it is intended. If you have received this message in error, please notify the originator immediately. If you are not the intended recipient, you are notified that you are strictly prohibited from using, copying, altering, or disclosing the contents of this message. Aricent accepts no responsibility for loss or damage arising from the use of the information transmitted by this email including damage from virus."
>>>> N‹§ēæėrļ›yúčšØbēXŽķĮ§vØ^–)Þš{.nĮ+‰·ĨŠ{ąąËiŠ{ayš ʇڙë,j
>>> ĒfĢĒ·hš‹āzđ ŪwĨĒļ
>>> Ē·Ķj:+v‰ĻŠwčjØmķŸĸū
>>> Ŧ‘ęįzZ+ƒųšˇŠÝĒj"¯ú!
>>>
>>> "DISCLAIMER: This message is proprietary to Aricent and is intended solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. It may contain privileged or confidential information and should not be circulated or used for any purpose other than for what it is intended. If you have received this message in error, please notify the originator immediately. If you are not the intended recipient, you are notified that you are strictly prohibited from using, copying, altering, or disclosing the contents of this message. Aricent accepts no responsibility for loss or damage arising from the use of the information transmitted by this email including damage from virus."
>>> N r y b X ǧv ^ ){.n + { i {ay ʇڙ ,j f h z
>>> w j:+v w j m zZ+ ݢj" !tml=
>>>
>>
>> --
>> 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
> --
> 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
>
--
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
"DISCLAIMER: This message is proprietary to Aricent and is intended solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. It may contain privileged or confidential information and should not be circulated or used for any purpose other than for what it is intended. If you have received this message in error, please notify the originator immediately. If you are not the intended recipient, you are notified that you are strictly prohibited from using, copying, altering, or disclosing the contents of this message. Aricent accepts no responsibility for loss or damage arising from the use of the information transmitted by this email including damage from virus."
[-- Attachment #2: sctp_hb_retransmission.pcapng --]
[-- Type: application/octet-stream, Size: 11656 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread* Re: SCTP heartbeat transmission interval in not working as expected
2015-08-17 11:45 SCTP heartbeat transmission interval in not working as expected Ravi Puttachannaiah
` (9 preceding siblings ...)
2015-08-19 5:37 ` Ravi Puttachannaiah
@ 2015-08-19 17:25 ` Vlad Yasevich
2015-08-20 14:30 ` Ravi Puttachannaiah
11 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: Vlad Yasevich @ 2015-08-19 17:25 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-sctp
On 08/18/2015 10:37 PM, Ravi Puttachannaiah wrote:
> Hi Malc,
>
> Did you get a chance to check the wireshark traces I shared ?. Could you please help.
>
Ravi
I've looked at the traces you've provided and the HBs interval is correctly enforced.
The formula you initially posted is not correct and that stems from a slightly confusing
text in the RFC. Please look lower in this email to see the explanation.
Hope that clears things up.
-vlad
>
> Regards,
>
> Ravi
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: linux-sctp-owner@vger.kernel.org [mailto:linux-sctp-owner@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Vlad Yasevich
> Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2015 9:05 PM
> To: malc; linux-sctp@vger.kernel.org
> Subject: Re: SCTP heartbeat transmission interval in not working as expected
>
> On 08/17/2015 04:06 PM, malc wrote:
>> Hey Vlad, Ravi,
>>
>> Pretty sure the initial confusion was around the first HB apparently
>> not using HB.Interval + RTO.*Init* (=3s in the given scenario) +/-
>> 50%. (I sent a message suggesting that this would not be the case if
>> DATA/SACK had been exchanged causing an RTT calculation before the HB
>> timer was started, but forgot to set plaintext so vger bounced me...)
>> I am pretty sure this can happen if we bundle DATA with COOKIE ECHO,
>> wasn't sure if we do an RTO calc for any of the initial handshake
>> /without/ DATA being exchanged (spec doesn't say to afaik, but it
>> doesn't say not to either...)
>
> First HB on a non-primary path will be within an RTO without HB.Interval as it would be a path confirmation probe HB. Until the path is confirmed, HBs are sent based on RTO only. Once the path is confirmed, HB.Interval takes effect.
>
> -vlad
>
>>
>> If Ravi can share wireshark traces - I guess it will make it most
>> obvious exactly which scenario he is seeing. I can tell you that last
>> time I tested with a 3rd party conformance tool (Testing Tech), albeit
>> a while ago now - this was all working as I understood it should.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> malc.
>>
>> On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 10:37 PM, Vlad Yasevich <vyasevich@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On 08/17/2015 06:45 AM, Ravi Puttachannaiah wrote:
>>>> Hi Michael,
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for your quick response. It will be helpful if you can explain why it should be 30.5 to 31.5.
>>>>
>>>> As per our understanding initially it should start with 33-seconds (30[HBInterval]+3[RTO initial]) right ?. Please correct me if my understanding is in-correct.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> So this is what the SCTP spec actually states:
>>>
>>> On an idle destination address that is allowed to heartbeat, it is
>>> recommended that a HEARTBEAT chunk is sent once per RTO of that
>>> destination address plus the protocol parameterh 'HB.interval', with
>>> jittering of +/- 50% of the RTO value, and exponential backoff of the
>>> RTO if the previous HEARTBEAT is unanswered.
>>>
>>>
>>> I can see how this could be interpreted as RTO + HB.Interval +/- 50%
>>> RTO, but that's not what should actually happen.
>>>
>>> The basis of the algorithm is that packet is sent once per RTO with
>>> an RTO jittering of %50. So, for the RTO of X, the base "once per
>>> RTO" transmission is .5X - 1.5X. Then you add to this the HB.Interval value.
>>>
>>> For your RTO values, with an RTO.min of 1sec, your RTO will most
>>> likely be clamped at 1 sec (unless you really have very long RTO values).
>>> This means that for HBs, your base RTO will vary between 0.5-1.5 sec.
>>>
>>> This should explain what you are actually seeing on the wire.
>>>
>>> -vlad
>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>>
>>>> Ravi
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Michael Tuexen [mailto:Michael.Tuexen@lurchi.franken.de]
>>>> Sent: Monday, August 17, 2015 6:43 PM
>>>> To: Ravi Puttachannaiah
>>>> Cc: linux-sctp@vger.kernel.org
>>>> Subject: Re: SCTP heartbeat transmission interval in not working as
>>>> expected
>>>>
>>>>> On 17 Aug 2015, at 13:45, Ravi Puttachannaiah <ravi.puttachannaiah@aricent.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> We are using LKSCTP (ver 1.0.16) and we observe that the SCTP heartbeat transmission interval in not working as expected. Following is the SCTP configuration settings we are using (applied using setsockopt()).
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> hbinterval0-sec
>>>>> RTO initial=3-sec
>>>>> RTO min=1-sec
>>>>> RTO max`-sec
>>>>>
>>>>> As per our understanding the SCTP heartbeat transmission interval value should be between 31.5 to 34.5 seconds as per the calculation "RTO+HBInterval+delta(Âą0.5ofRTO)" but we are always seeing the value in-between 30.6 to 31.5 seconds.
>>>> Assuming that the RTO is 1 second (after an RTT measurement this is
>>>> true, I guess), you would get HBs every
>>>> 30.5 and 31.5 seconds. Seems to be about what you measure.
>>>>
>>>> Best regards
>>>> Michael
>>>>>
>>>>> Could somebody confirm if this is an issue or not and in-case of an issue how we can resolve.
>>>>>
>>>>> We are using LKSCTP version 1.0.16 and 1.0.7 and in both the versions we are observing the same behavior.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>
>>>>> Ravi​
>>>>>
>>>>> "DISCLAIMER: This message is proprietary to Aricent and is intended solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. It may contain privileged or confidential information and should not be circulated or used for any purpose other than for what it is intended. If you have received this message in error, please notify the originator immediately. If you are not the intended recipient, you are notified that you are strictly prohibited from using, copying, altering, or disclosing the contents of this message. Aricent accepts no responsibility for loss or damage arising from the use of the information transmitted by this email including damage from virus."
>>>>> N‹§ēæėrļ›yúčšØbēXŽķĮ§vØ^–)Þš{.nĮ+‰·ĨŠ{ąąËiŠ{ayš ʇڙë,j
>>>> ĒfĢĒ·hš‹āzđ ŪwĨĒļ
>>>> Ē·Ķj:+v‰ĻŠwčjØmķŸĸū
>>>> Ŧ‘ęįzZ+ƒųšˇŠÝĒj"¯ú!
>>>>
>>>> "DISCLAIMER: This message is proprietary to Aricent and is intended solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. It may contain privileged or confidential information and should not be circulated or used for any purpose other than for what it is intended. If you have received this message in error, please notify the originator immediately. If you are not the intended recipient, you are notified that you are strictly prohibited from using, copying, altering, or disclosing the contents of this message. Aricent accepts no responsibility for loss or damage arising from the use of the information transmitted by this email including damage from virus."
>>>> N r y b X ǧv ^ ){.n + { i {ay ʇڙ ,j f h z
>>>> w j:+v w j m zZ+ ݢj" !tml>>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> 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
>> --
>> 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
>>
>
> --
> 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
> "DISCLAIMER: This message is proprietary to Aricent and is intended solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. It may contain privileged or confidential information and should not be circulated or used for any purpose other than for what it is intended. If you have received this message in error, please notify the originator immediately. If you are not the intended recipient, you are notified that you are strictly prohibited from using, copying, altering, or disclosing the contents of this message. Aricent accepts no responsibility for loss or damage arising from the use of the information transmitted by this email including damage from virus."
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread* RE: SCTP heartbeat transmission interval in not working as expected
2015-08-17 11:45 SCTP heartbeat transmission interval in not working as expected Ravi Puttachannaiah
` (10 preceding siblings ...)
2015-08-19 17:25 ` Vlad Yasevich
@ 2015-08-20 14:30 ` Ravi Puttachannaiah
11 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: Ravi Puttachannaiah @ 2015-08-20 14:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-sctp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^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread