Re: [Lksctp-developers] [PATCH] SCTP: drop SACK if ctsn is not less than the next tsn of assoc

[Sridhar Samudrala <sri@us.ibm.com>]

On Tue, 2007-07-31 at 07:37 -0400, Neil Horman wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 31, 2007 at 12:44:27PM +0800, Wei Yongjun wrote:
> > If SCTP data sender received a SACK which contains Cumulative TSN Ack is 
> > not less than the Cumulative TSN Ack Point, and if this Cumulative TSN 
> > Ack is not used by the data sender, SCTP data sender still accept this 
> > SACK , and next SACK which send correctly to DATA sender be dropped, 
> > because it is less than the new Cumulative TSN Ack Point.
> > After received this SACK, data will be retrans again and again even if 
> > correct SACK is received.
> > So I think this SACK must be dropped to let data transmit  correctly.
> > 
> > Following is the tcpdump of my test. And patch in this mail can avoid 
> > this problem.
> > 
> > 02:19:38.233278 sctp (1) [INIT] [init tag: 1250461886] [rwnd: 54784] [OS: 10] [MIS: 65535] [init TSN: 217114040] 
> > 02:19:39.782160 sctp (1) [INIT ACK] [init tag: 1] [rwnd: 54784] [OS: 100] [MIS: 65535] [init TSN: 100] 
> > 02:19:39.798583 sctp (1) [COOKIE ECHO] 
> > 02:19:40.082125 sctp (1) [COOKIE ACK] 
> > 02:19:40.097859 sctp (1) [DATA] (B)(E) [TSN: 217114040] [SID: 0] [SSEQ 0] [PPID 0xf192090b] 
> > 02:19:40.100162 sctp (1) [DATA] (B)(E) [TSN: 217114041] [SID: 0] [SSEQ 1] [PPID 0x3e467007] 
> > 02:19:40.100779 sctp (1) [DATA] (B)(E) [TSN: 217114042] [SID: 0] [SSEQ 2] [PPID 0x11b12a0a] 
> > 02:19:40.101200 sctp (1) [DATA] (B)(E) [TSN: 217114043] [SID: 0] [SSEQ 3] [PPID 0x30e7d979] 
> > 02:19:40.561147 sctp (1) [SACK] [cum ack 217114040] [a_rwnd 54784] [#gap acks 0] [#dup tsns 0] 
> > 02:19:40.568498 sctp (1) [DATA] (B)(E) [TSN: 217114044] [SID: 0] [SSEQ 4] [PPID 0x251ff86f] 
> > 02:19:40.569308 sctp (1) [DATA] (B)(E) [TSN: 217114045] [SID: 0] [SSEQ 5] [PPID 0xe5d5da5d] 
> > 02:19:40.700584 sctp (1) [SACK] [cum ack 290855864] [a_rwnd 54784] [#gap acks 0] [#dup tsns 0] 
> > 02:19:40.701562 sctp (1) [DATA] (B)(E) [TSN: 217114046] [SID: 0] [SSEQ 6] [PPID 0x87d8b423] 
> > 02:19:40.701567 sctp (1) [DATA] (B)(E) [TSN: 217114047] [SID: 0] [SSEQ 7] [PPID 0xca47e645] 
> > 02:19:40.701569 sctp (1) [DATA] (B)(E) [TSN: 217114048] [SID: 0] [SSEQ 8] [PPID 0x6c0ea150] 
> > 02:19:40.701576 sctp (1) [DATA] (B)(E) [TSN: 217114049] [SID: 0] [SSEQ 9] [PPID 0x9cc1994f] 
> > 02:19:40.701585 sctp (1) [DATA] (B)(E) [TSN: 217114050] [SID: 0] [SSEQ 10] [PPID 0xb1df4129] 
> > 02:19:41.098201 sctp (1) [SACK] [cum ack 217114041] [a_rwnd 54784] [#gap acks 0] [#dup tsns 0] 
> > 02:19:41.283257 sctp (1) [SACK] [cum ack 217114042] [a_rwnd 54784] [#gap acks 0] [#dup tsns 0] 
> > 02:19:41.457217 sctp (1) [SACK] [cum ack 217114043] [a_rwnd 54784] [#gap acks 0] [#dup tsns 0] 
> > 02:19:41.691528 sctp (1) [SACK] [cum ack 217114044] [a_rwnd 54784] [#gap acks 0] [#dup tsns 0] 
> > 02:19:41.849636 sctp (1) [SACK] [cum ack 217114045] [a_rwnd 54784] [#gap acks 0] [#dup tsns 0] 
> > 02:19:41.975473 sctp (1) [DATA] (B)(E) [TSN: 217114046] [SID: 0] [SSEQ 6] [PPID 0x87d8b423] 
> > 02:19:42.021229 sctp (1) [SACK] [cum ack 217114046] [a_rwnd 54784] [#gap acks 0] [#dup tsns 0] 
> > 02:19:42.196495 sctp (1) [SACK] [cum ack 217114047] [a_rwnd 54784] [#gap acks 0] [#dup tsns 0] 
> > 02:19:42.424319 sctp (1) [SACK] [cum ack 217114048] [a_rwnd 54784] [#gap acks 0] [#dup tsns 0] 
> > 02:19:42.586924 sctp (1) [SACK] [cum ack 217114049] [a_rwnd 54784] [#gap acks 0] [#dup tsns 0] 
> > 02:19:42.744810 sctp (1) [SACK] [cum ack 217114050] [a_rwnd 54784] [#gap acks 0] [#dup tsns 0] 
> > 02:19:42.965536 sctp (1) [SACK] [cum ack 217114046] [a_rwnd 54784] [#gap acks 0] [#dup tsns 0] 
> > 02:19:43.106385 sctp (1) [DATA] (B)(E) [TSN: 217114046] [SID: 0] [SSEQ 6] [PPID 0x87d8b423] 
> > 02:19:43.218969 sctp (1) [SACK] [cum ack 217114046] [a_rwnd 54784] [#gap acks 0] [#dup tsns 0] 
> > 02:19:45.374101 sctp (1) [DATA] (B)(E) [TSN: 217114046] [SID: 0] [SSEQ 6] [PPID 0x87d8b423] 
> > 02:19:45.489258 sctp (1) [SACK] [cum ack 217114046] [a_rwnd 54784] [#gap acks 0] [#dup tsns 0] 
> > 02:19:49.830116 sctp (1) [DATA] (B)(E) [TSN: 217114046] [SID: 0] [SSEQ 6] [PPID 0x87d8b423] 
> > 02:19:49.984577 sctp (1) [SACK] [cum ack 217114046] [a_rwnd 54784] [#gap acks 0] [#dup tsns 0] 
> > 02:19:58.760300 sctp (1) [DATA] (B)(E) [TSN: 217114046] [SID: 0] [SSEQ 6] [PPID 0x87d8b423] 
> > 02:19:58.931690 sctp (1) [SACK] [cum ack 217114046] [a_rwnd 54784] [#gap acks 0] [#dup tsns 0] 
> > 
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Wei Yongjun <yjwei@cn.fujitsu.com>
> > 
> > --- net/sctp/sm_statefuns.c.orig	2007-07-29 18:11:01.000000000 -0400
> > +++ net/sctp/sm_statefuns.c	2007-07-29 18:14:49.000000000 -0400
> > @@ -2880,6 +2880,15 @@ sctp_disposition_t sctp_sf_eat_sack_6_2(
> >  		return SCTP_DISPOSITION_DISCARD;
> >  	}
> >  
> > +	/* If Cumulative TSN Ack is not less than the Cumulative TSN
> > +	 * Ack which will be send in the next data, drop the SACK.
> > +	 */
> > +	if (!TSN_lt(ctsn, asoc->next_tsn)) {
> > +		SCTP_DEBUG_PRINTK("ctsn %x\n", ctsn);
> > +		SCTP_DEBUG_PRINTK("next_tsn %x\n", asoc->next_tsn);
> > +		return SCTP_DISPOSITION_DISCARD;
> > +	}
> > +
> >  	/* Return this SACK for further processing.  */
> >  	sctp_add_cmd_sf(commands, SCTP_CMD_PROCESS_SACK, SCTP_SACKH(sackh));
> >  
> > 
> > 
> Whats the behavior on this in the event that a sack is received in which the
> ctsn falls within a a missing space in a stream of gap acks?  I.e. what if the
> sack being sent falls into a hole between the ack point and the first gap ack
> range?  Does this patch impact that at all?
> 
> Also, what is this:
> 02:19:40.700584 sctp (1) [SACK] [cum ack 290855864] ....
> 
> That ack value seems rather out of range for the rest of the trace. Was that
> part of your test?  If so, what caused it?

Yes. This SACK seems to be totally out of range and may be causing the problem.

I would expect the following check in sctp_sf_eat_sack_6_2() to drop any SACKs
with CTSN value lower than the earlier SACKs.

        /* i) If Cumulative TSN Ack is less than the Cumulative TSN
         *     Ack Point, then drop the SACK.  Since Cumulative TSN
         *     Ack is monotonically increasing, a SACK whose
         *     Cumulative TSN Ack is less than the Cumulative TSN Ack
         *     Point indicates an out-of-order SACK.
         */
        if (TSN_lt(ctsn, asoc->ctsn_ack_point)) {
                SCTP_DEBUG_PRINTK("ctsn %x\n", ctsn);
                SCTP_DEBUG_PRINTK("ctsn_ack_point %x\n", asoc->ctsn_ack_point);
                return SCTP_DISPOSITION_DISCARD;
        }

Thanks
Sridhar