From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Eric Dumazet Subject: Re: 2.6.34: Problem with UDP traffic on lo + poll(?) Date: Mon, 06 Sep 2010 22:29:15 +0200 Message-ID: <1283804955.2585.12.camel@edumazet-laptop> References: <1283802132.2585.4.camel@edumazet-laptop> <4C854737.5040503@ans.pl> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org To: Krzysztof =?UTF-8?Q?Ol=C4=99dzki?= Return-path: Received: from mail-ww0-f44.google.com ([74.125.82.44]:35628 "EHLO mail-ww0-f44.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754165Ab0IFU3V (ORCPT ); Mon, 6 Sep 2010 16:29:21 -0400 Received: by wwj40 with SMTP id 40so7044426wwj.1 for ; Mon, 06 Sep 2010 13:29:20 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <4C854737.5040503@ans.pl> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Le lundi 06 septembre 2010 =C3=A0 21:55 +0200, Krzysztof Ol=C4=99dzki a= =C3=A9crit : > Yes, conntrack is one of possibilities. However, this problem only=20 > manifests on 2.6.34 and never on 2.6.31 where iptables and conntrack=20 > configurations are identically. And of course, each time it is a=20 > different port. >=20 > Please also note that this problem only exists when communication is=20 > handled over a loopback interface - I'm not able to trigger this from= a=20 > remote host even if I run the test on two hosts (local & remote)=20 > simultaneously. >=20 No particular error shown in "netstat -s" ? port randomization on UDP changed in the past, and conntracking changed a bit too ;)