From: Cong Wang <amwang@redhat.com>
To: Neil Horman <nhorman@tuxdriver.com>
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
Alexey Kuznetsov <kuznet@ms2.inr.ac.ru>,
Patrick McHardy <kaber@trash.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH net-next] tcp: introduce tcp_tw_interval to specifiy the time of TIME-WAIT
Date: Mon, 08 Oct 2012 11:17:37 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1349666257.2707.6.camel@cr0> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20121002120927.GA691@hmsreliant.think-freely.org>
On Tue, 2012-10-02 at 08:09 -0400, Neil Horman wrote:
> No, its not very friendly, but the people using this are violating the RFC,
> which isn't very friendly. :)
Could you be more specific? In RFC 793, AFAIK, it is allowed to be
changed:
http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc793
" To be sure that a TCP does not create a segment that carries a
sequence number which may be duplicated by an old segment remaining in
the network, the TCP must keep quiet for a maximum segment lifetime
(MSL) before assigning any sequence numbers upon starting up or
recovering from a crash in which memory of sequence numbers in use was
lost. For this specification the MSL is taken to be 2 minutes. This
is an engineering choice, and may be changed if experience indicates
it is desirable to do so."
or I must still be missing something here... :)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-10-08 3:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-09-27 8:41 [RFC PATCH net-next] tcp: introduce tcp_tw_interval to specifiy the time of TIME-WAIT Cong Wang
2012-09-27 14:23 ` Neil Horman
2012-09-27 17:02 ` Rick Jones
2012-09-28 6:33 ` Cong Wang
2012-09-28 6:43 ` David Miller
2012-09-28 17:30 ` Rick Jones
2012-09-28 13:16 ` Neil Horman
2012-10-02 7:04 ` Cong Wang
2012-10-02 12:09 ` Neil Horman
2012-10-08 3:17 ` Cong Wang [this message]
2012-10-08 14:07 ` Neil Horman
2012-10-09 3:42 ` Cong Wang
2012-09-27 17:05 ` David Miller
2012-09-28 6:39 ` Cong Wang
2012-09-28 6:44 ` David Miller
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=1349666257.2707.6.camel@cr0 \
--to=amwang@redhat.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=kaber@trash.net \
--cc=kuznet@ms2.inr.ac.ru \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nhorman@tuxdriver.com \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).