From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>
To: Alex Bergmann <alex@linlab.net>
Cc: davem@davemloft.net, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Jerry Chu <hkchu@google.com>,
Neal Cardwell <ncardwell@google.com>,
Nandita Dukkipati <nanditad@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] tcp: Wrong timeout for SYN segments
Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2012 10:06:38 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1345622798.5158.717.camel@edumazet-glaptop> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <503419D3.1080700@linlab.net>
On Wed, 2012-08-22 at 01:29 +0200, Alex Bergmann wrote:
> Hi David,
>
> I'm not 100% sure, but it looks like I found an RFC mismatch with the
> current default values of the TCP implementation.
>
> Alex
>
> From 8b854a525eb45f64ad29dfab16f9d9f681e84495 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Alexander Bergmann <alex@linlab.net>
> Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2012 00:29:08 +0200
> Subject: [PATCH 1/1] tcp: Wrong timeout for SYN segments
>
> Commit 9ad7c049 changed the initRTO from 3secs to 1sec in accordance to
> RFC6298 (former RFC2988bis). This introduced a gap with RFC1122 that
> defines a minimum retransmission window for SYN segments of at least
> 180secs.
>
> Prior to 9ad7c049 the timeout was defined with 189secs. Now we have only
> a timeout of 63secs.
>
> ((2 << 5) - 1) * 3 secs = 189 secs
> ((2 << 5) - 1) * 1 secs = 63 secs
Strange maths ... here I have :
(1+2+4+8+16) * 3 = 93 secs
vs
(1+2+4+8+16) * 1 = 31 secs
So even before said commit, we were not rfc1122 compliant.
Using 7 retries would give 127 seconds, still not rfc compliant.
>
> To fulfill the MUST constraint in RFC1122 section 4.2.3.5 about R2 for
> SYN segments, the values of TCP_SYN_RETRIES and TCP_SYNACK_RETRIES must
> be changed to 7 reties.
>
> ((2 << 7) - 1) * 1 secs = 255 secs
>
> This would result in an ETIMEDOUT of 4 minutes 15 seconds.
>
> Signed-off-by: Alexander Bergmann <alex@linlab.net>
> ---
> include/net/tcp.h | 4 ++--
> 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/net/tcp.h b/include/net/tcp.h
> index 1f000ff..7eaae19 100644
> --- a/include/net/tcp.h
> +++ b/include/net/tcp.h
> @@ -98,10 +98,10 @@ extern void tcp_time_wait(struct sock *sk, int state, int timeo);
> * 15 is ~13-30min depending on RTO.
> */
>
> -#define TCP_SYN_RETRIES 5 /* number of times to retry active opening a
> +#define TCP_SYN_RETRIES 7 /* number of times to retry active opening a
> * connection: ~180sec is RFC minimum */
>
> -#define TCP_SYNACK_RETRIES 5 /* number of times to retry passive opening a
> +#define TCP_SYNACK_RETRIES 7 /* number of times to retry passive opening a
> * connection: ~180sec is RFC minimum */
>
> #define TCP_TIMEWAIT_LEN (60*HZ) /* how long to wait to destroy TIME-WAIT
Nice catch !
I kind of disagree with the SYNACK part.
RFC 1122 says in 4.2.3.5 :
However, the values of R1 and R2 may be different for SYN
and data segments. In particular, R2 for a SYN segment MUST
be set large enough to provide retransmission of the segment
for at least 3 minutes. The application can close the
connection (i.e., give up on the open attempt) sooner, of
course.
I am not sure SYNACK segments were considered as a 'SYN segment' in this
section. (as the application cannot 'close' the connection on the passive
side, only kernel is aware of a SYN_RECV socket)
Increasing TCP_SYNACK_RETRIES from 5 to 7 or 8 amplifies the
SYN/synflood problem.
A valid client should retransmit its SYN packet for 180 seconds, I dont
believe we should make sure the SYNACK will be sent for 180 seconds as
well.
If we _really_ want to have a 3 minutes R2 for SYNACK, I suggest
changing things to that we dont send more than 5 SYNACKS, maybe using
RTO=6 after one retransmit
current situation :
1 sec
2 sec
4 sec
8 sec
16 sec
----
total of 31 seconds
1 sec
12 sec // switch to RTO = 6
24 sec
48 sec
96 sec
-----
total of 181 seconds
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-08-22 8:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-08-21 23:29 [PATCH 1/1] tcp: Wrong timeout for SYN segments Alex Bergmann
2012-08-22 8:06 ` Eric Dumazet [this message]
2012-08-22 8:48 ` Alex Bergmann
2012-08-22 8:58 ` Eric Dumazet
2012-08-22 9:29 ` Alex Bergmann
2012-08-22 9:59 ` Eric Dumazet
2012-08-22 10:03 ` Eric Dumazet
2012-08-22 17:29 ` H.K. Jerry Chu
2012-08-22 16:44 ` H.K. Jerry Chu
[not found] ` <CAFbMe2M7ekc94bQk7vTS1LhScPd49VZ-zKOCUXhqwxXtL-nkuA@mail.gmail.com>
2012-08-23 11:58 ` Alex Bergmann
2012-08-23 12:15 ` Eric Dumazet
2012-08-23 12:35 ` David Laight
2012-08-23 12:51 ` Eric Dumazet
2012-08-23 12:37 ` Alex Bergmann
2012-08-23 12:49 ` Eric Dumazet
2012-08-24 12:17 ` Alex Bergmann
2012-08-24 17:42 ` David Miller
2012-08-25 8:48 ` Alexander Bergmann
2012-08-25 9:01 ` Eric Dumazet
2012-08-28 8:44 ` Carsten Wolff
[not found] ` <1346414260.2591.8.camel@edumazet-glaptop>
2012-08-31 12:48 ` Alexander Bergmann
2012-08-31 13:25 ` Eric Dumazet
2012-08-31 19:42 ` David Miller
2012-08-31 19:47 ` David Miller
2012-08-29 4:34 ` H.K. Jerry Chu
2012-08-29 8:51 ` Eric Dumazet
2012-08-29 17:25 ` H.K. Jerry Chu
2012-08-30 13:12 ` Eric Dumazet
2012-08-30 16:45 ` David Miller
2012-08-30 18:04 ` H.K. Jerry Chu
2012-08-30 17:59 ` H.K. Jerry Chu
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1345622798.5158.717.camel@edumazet-glaptop \
--to=eric.dumazet@gmail.com \
--cc=alex@linlab.net \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=hkchu@google.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nanditad@google.com \
--cc=ncardwell@google.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox