From: Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com>
To: netdev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Flaw in RFC793 (Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-gont-tcpm-tcp-seq-validation-03.txt)
Date: Tue, 6 Mar 2018 04:21:32 -0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1da2d1de-cb93-dc8b-7909-a8628a71a60b@si6networks.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <152029339529.12825.5038413838558267392.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Folks,
Dave Borman and me are trying to get this flaw fixed in the TCP spec --
this is of particular interest since the IETF finally agreed to revise
the old spec. The working copy of our document is:
<https://www.si6networks.com/publications/drafts/draft-gont-tcpm-tcp-seq-validation-04.txt>
I'm wondering if any Linux TCP expert could help with this:
* Would you mind taking a look at our doc, and check if our description
of the Linux behavior is correct?
* If you do something different or better, we'd also like to know.
Thanks!
Cheers,
Fernando
-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject: New Version Notification for
draft-gont-tcpm-tcp-seq-validation-03.txt
Date: Mon, 05 Mar 2018 15:43:15 -0800
From: internet-drafts@ietf.org
To: Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com>, David Borman
<david.borman@quantum.com>
A new version of I-D, draft-gont-tcpm-tcp-seq-validation-03.txt
has been successfully submitted by Fernando Gont and posted to the
IETF repository.
Name: draft-gont-tcpm-tcp-seq-validation
Revision: 03
Title: On the Validation of TCP Sequence Numbers
Document date: 2018-03-05
Group: Individual Submission
Pages: 16
URL:
https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-gont-tcpm-tcp-seq-validation-03.txt
Status:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-gont-tcpm-tcp-seq-validation/
Htmlized:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-gont-tcpm-tcp-seq-validation-03
Htmlized:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-gont-tcpm-tcp-seq-validation-03
Diff:
https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-gont-tcpm-tcp-seq-validation-03
Abstract:
When TCP receives packets that lie outside of the receive window, the
corresponding packets are dropped and either an ACK, RST or no
response is generated due to the out-of-window packet, with no
further processing of the packet. Most of the time, this works just
fine and TCP remains stable, especially when a TCP connection has
unidirectional data flow. However, there are three scenarios in
which packets that are outside of the receive window should still
have their ACK field processed, or else a packet war will take place.
The aforementioned issues have affected a number of popular TCP
implementations, typically leading to connection failures, system
crashes, or other undesirable behaviors. This document describes the
three scenarios in which the aforementioned issues might arise, and
formally updates RFC 793 such that these potential problems are
mitigated.
Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission
until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.
The IETF Secretariat
next parent reply other threads:[~2018-03-06 7:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <152029339529.12825.5038413838558267392.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
2018-03-06 7:21 ` Fernando Gont [this message]
2018-03-06 16:37 ` Flaw in RFC793 (Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-gont-tcpm-tcp-seq-validation-03.txt) Eric Dumazet
2018-03-06 16:41 ` Fernando Gont
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=1da2d1de-cb93-dc8b-7909-a8628a71a60b@si6networks.com \
--to=fgont@si6networks.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