From: John Heffner <jheffner@psc.edu>
To: Benjamin LaHaise <bcrl@kvack.org>
Cc: Evgeniy Polyakov <johnpol@2ka.mipt.ru>,
David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] TCP FIN gets dropped prematurely, results in ack storm
Date: Tue, 01 May 2007 13:54:03 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <46377EBB.6080604@psc.edu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20070501164935.GC1751@kvack.org>
Benjamin LaHaise wrote:
>> According to your patch, several packets with fin bit might be sent,
>> including one with data. If another host does not receive fin
>> retransmit, then that logic is broken, and it can not be fixed by
>> duplicating fins, I would even say, that remote box should drop second
>> packet with fin, while it can carry data, which will break higher
>> connection logic.
>
> The FIN hasn't been ack'd by the other side, though and yet Linux is no
> longer transmitting packets with it sent. Read the beginning of the trace.
I agree completely with Evgeniy. The patch you sent would cause bad
breakage by sending the FIN bit on segments with different sequence numbers.
Looking at your trace, it seems like the behavior of the test system
192.168.2.2 is broken in two ways. First, like you said it has broken
state in that it has forgotten that it sent the FIN. Once you do that,
the connection state is corrupt and all bets are off. It's sending an
out-of-window segment that's getting tossed by Linux, and Linux
generates an ack in response. This is in direct RFC compliance. The
second problem is that the other system is generating these broken acks
in response to the legitimate acks Linux is sending, causing the ack
war. I can't really guess why it's doing that...
You might be able to change Linux to prevent this ack war, but doing so
would break RFC compliance, and given the buggy nature of the other end,
it sounds to me like a bad idea.
-John
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-05-01 17:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-05-01 15:13 [PATCH] TCP FIN gets dropped prematurely, results in ack storm Benjamin LaHaise
2007-05-01 16:20 ` Evgeniy Polyakov
2007-05-01 16:49 ` Benjamin LaHaise
2007-05-01 17:41 ` Evgeniy Polyakov
2007-05-01 17:53 ` Benjamin LaHaise
2007-05-01 18:03 ` John Heffner
2007-05-01 19:19 ` Benjamin LaHaise
2007-05-01 20:24 ` David Miller
2007-05-01 17:57 ` Evgeniy Polyakov
2007-05-01 18:02 ` Evgeniy Polyakov
2007-05-01 17:54 ` John Heffner [this message]
2007-05-01 18:04 ` Benjamin LaHaise
2007-05-01 18:07 ` Evgeniy Polyakov
2007-05-01 18:20 ` Evgeniy Polyakov
2007-05-01 18:25 ` Evgeniy Polyakov
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=46377EBB.6080604@psc.edu \
--to=jheffner@psc.edu \
--cc=bcrl@kvack.org \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=johnpol@2ka.mipt.ru \
--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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).