From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Florian Westphal Subject: Re: [PATCH -next] net: tcp: move to timewait when receiving data post active-close Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2015 18:32:34 +0100 Message-ID: <20151118173234.GB5860@breakpoint.cc> References: <1447859024-1040-1-git-send-email-fw@strlen.de> <1447860480.22599.151.camel@edumazet-glaptop2.roam.corp.google.com> <20151118153621.GA5860@breakpoint.cc> <1447861591.22599.157.camel@edumazet-glaptop2.roam.corp.google.com> <1447862057.909111.443349025.5B7D067D@webmail.messagingengine.com> <1447867736.22599.169.camel@edumazet-glaptop2.roam.corp.google.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Hannes Frederic Sowa , Florian Westphal , netdev@vger.kernel.org, marcelo.leitner@gmail.com To: Eric Dumazet Return-path: Received: from Chamillionaire.breakpoint.cc ([80.244.247.6]:46289 "EHLO Chamillionaire.breakpoint.cc" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755238AbbKRRcg (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 Nov 2015 12:32:36 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1447867736.22599.169.camel@edumazet-glaptop2.roam.corp.google.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Eric Dumazet wrote: > On Wed, 2015-11-18 at 16:54 +0100, Hannes Frederic Sowa wrote: > > > Still, the RST packet can be dropped along the way. So the teardown of > > the socket on the other side might not happen. > > This is why it is better to send RST for every incoming in-excess packet I'm convinced and marked patch as rejected in patchwork. Thanks Eric!