Re: TCP: orphans broken by RFC 2525 #2.17

[Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>]

Le lundi 27 septembre 2010 à 21:24 +0200, Willy Tarreau a écrit :
> Hi Julian
> 
> [removed Davem from the CC upon his request, not to pollute him]
> 
> On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 12:12:24PM +0300, Julian Anastasov wrote:
> > 	If it is not already mentioned, the application can
> > know if sent data is acked. I think, ioctl SIOCOUTQ is for
> > this purpose. May be the application that wants to send
> > reliably HTTP error response before closing should do something
> > like:
> > 
> > - add this FD in some list for monitoring instead of keeping
> > large connection state
> > - use shutdown SHUT_WR to add FIN after response
> > - use setsockopt SO_RCVBUF with some low value to close the
> > RX window, we do not want the body
> > - wait for POLLHUP (FIN), not for POLLIN because we want to
> > ignore data, not to read it. Still, data can be read and
> > dropped if needed to release the socket memory
> > - use timer to limit the time we wait our data to be acked
> > - use SIOCOUTQ to know if everything is received in peer and
> > then close the fd
> 
> Thanks very much for this suggestion. I was looking for something
> like this and even looked at the tcp_info struct, but it did not
> look very easy to use.
> 
> Still, I think that polling on POLLIN and checking with SIOCOUTQ
> on every read to see if the out queue is now empty would do the
> trick, without forcing to read huge amounts of unnecessary data.
> 
> I'll simply enclose that inside a #ifdef LINUX and that should be
> OK. It kinda sucks to be able to workaround low level issues at the
> application level but at least this workaround is acceptable.

Just a point :

RFC1122 :

	A host MAY implement a "half-duplex" TCP close sequence, so
        that an application that has called CLOSE cannot continue to
        read data from the connection.  If such a host issues a
        CLOSE call while received data is still pending in TCP, or
        if new data is received after CLOSE is called, its TCP
        SHOULD send a RST to show that data was lost.


Maybe only linux respects the RFC ? ;)