From: Stephan von Krawczynski <skraw@ithnet.com>
To: netdev@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: 2.4 and ip fragmentation question (background info)
Date: Fri, 2 Jan 2004 13:39:13 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20040102133913.488cd537.skraw@ithnet.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20031231122325.77f19143.skraw@ithnet.com>
On Wed, 31 Dec 2003 12:23:25 +0100
Stephan von Krawczynski <skraw@ithnet.com> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> is ip fragmentation thought to work with multiple fragmented packets all with
> same ID field, same source and destination address? Or can one consider this
> situation as generally unsolvable and broken by application?
>
> Regards,
> Stephan
As this question obviously sounded significantly stupid enough not to be
answered I may point you to this code in 2.4 include/net/ip.h:
static inline void ip_select_ident(struct iphdr *iph, struct dst_entry *dst,
struct sock *sk)
{
if (iph->frag_off&__constant_htons(IP_DF)) {
/* This is only to work around buggy Windows95/2000
* VJ compression implementations. If the ID field
* does not change, they drop every other packet in
* a TCP stream using header compression.
*/
iph->id = ((sk && sk->daddr) ? htons(sk->protinfo.af_inet.id++)
: 0);
} else
__ip_select_ident(iph, dst);
}
As you all know this sets the ID field inside the ip-header. Interestingly it
depends on frag_off and sk->daddr field.
I ran into an application (formerly for 2.2 kernel) where the author (!=me)
obviously was unaware of this dependency and initialised these fields after
calling ip_select_ident. The outcome was that everything runs normal during low
traffic, but when more packets were transferred it looked like a increasing
amount of packets got "0" as ID, because iph->frag_off was not initialised
correctly and the skbs were of course not zeroed. Still this would have been no
problem if these packets weren't fragmented.
What I saw was that packets got corrupted during high load (because
fragmentation obviously vomitted on the high rate of "ID=0" packets), but all
was perfectly well during low load.
Should the author have read some doc where it is clearly stated that
ip_select_ident needs a more or less completely initialised ip header to work
as expected? (other way round see my original question...)
Regards,
Stephan
prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-01-02 12:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-12-31 11:23 2.4 and ip fragmentation question Stephan von Krawczynski
2004-01-02 12:39 ` Stephan von Krawczynski [this message]
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=20040102133913.488cd537.skraw@ithnet.com \
--to=skraw@ithnet.com \
--cc=netdev@oss.sgi.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).