From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754266AbaHOJcy (ORCPT ); Fri, 15 Aug 2014 05:32:54 -0400 Received: from mail-pd0-f175.google.com ([209.85.192.175]:60277 "EHLO mail-pd0-f175.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751347AbaHOJcw (ORCPT ); Fri, 15 Aug 2014 05:32:52 -0400 Message-ID: <53EDD3B9.9070301@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 15 Aug 2014 17:32:41 +0800 From: zhuyj User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: LKML , netdev , Vlad Yasevich , tuexen@fh-muenster.de, khandelwal.deepak.1987@gmail.com, "Tao, Yue" , Alexandre Dietsch , "David S. Miller" , zhuyj Subject: Re: SCTP_PEER_ADDR_CHANGE Notification over UNCONFIRMED path References: <53EDC9AA.9080500@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <53EDC9AA.9080500@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Sorry. I used attachment to send patch. Maybe it is not convenient. Now I resend it again. Please ignore this mail. Best Regards! Zhu Yanjun On 08/15/2014 04:49 PM, zhuyj wrote: > Hi, Vlad && DEEPAK && Michael && David > > From Michael && DEEPAK > " > lxr SCTP implementation, doesn't transit the path state to INACTIVE, > if it was never confirmed. this leads to SCTP_PEER_ADDRESS_CHANGE > notification after each failed probe from this time. > Is there any specific reason to have same notification to SCTP User > with each probe in RTO time period ? > 806 case SCTP_TRANSPORT_DOWN: > 807 /* If the transport was never confirmed, do not transition it > 808 * to inactive state. Also, release the cached route since > 809 * there may be a better route next time. > 810 */ > 811 if (transport->state != SCTP_UNCONFIRMED) > > 812 transport->state = SCTP_INACTIVE; > > http://lxr.free-electrons.com/source/net/sctp/associola.c#L806 > > we checked RFC and here it is mentioned as Path Verification > Section(5.4) of RFC 4960 http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4960 > > In each RTO, a probe may be sent on an active UNCONFIRMED path in an > attempt to move it to the CONFIRMED state. If during this probing > the path becomes inactive, this rate is lowered to the normal > HEARTBEAT rate. At the expiration of the RTO timer, the error > counter of any path that was probed but not CONFIRMED is incremented > by one and subjected to path failure detection, as defined in > Section > > > 8.2 > . When probing UNCONFIRMED addresses, however, the association > overall error counter is not incremented > > > Does this mean that in attempt to move a UNCONFIRMED path to > CONFIRMED State, the path can become INACTIVE, when transport error > counter reaches to path_max_retrans counter ? > I would say that the path stays UNCONFIRMED. > > > I would also only expect a SCTP_PEER_ADDRESS_CHANGE notification > when a path state changes, not on every try. > > " > > I made a patch to disable sending SCTP_PEER_ADDRESS_CHANGE > notification every try. Now the patch is in the attachment. Please > check it. > > Zhu Yanjun