From: Wei Yongjun <yjwei@cn.fujitsu.com>
To: Michio Honda <micchie@sfc.wide.ad.jp>
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, lksctp-developers@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next-2.6 v4 4/5] sctp: Add ASCONF operation on the single-homed host
Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2011 10:45:32 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4DB4E04C.70609@cn.fujitsu.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <B73D6B9F-3BD0-4563-9921-AC328C686276@sfc.wide.ad.jp>
> Yes, I think the association cannot be kept, if the single-homed ASCONF receiver moves to the new network before sending ASCONF-ACK.
> Am I missing?
Oh, yeah, you are right.:-)
> Thanks,
> - Michio
>
> On Apr 25, 2011, at 11:02 , Wei Yongjun wrote:
>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Such operation would not be supported by specification, in Sec.5.3 in RFC 5061:
>>> F1) When adding an IP address to an association, the IP address is
>>> NOT considered fully added to the association until the ASCONF-
>>> ACK arrives. This means that until such time as the ASCONF
>>> containing the add is acknowledged, the sender MUST NOT use the
>>> new IP address as a source for ANY SCTP packet except on
>>> carrying an ASCONF Chunk.
>>>
>>> I think this means we cannot send ASCONF-ACK from the new address even if it bundles ASCONF...
>> If so, both side do not have valid address to send the such
>> ASCONF-ACK, and can not recv ASCONF-ACK.
>>
>>> - Michio
>>>
>>> On Apr 25, 2011, at 9:57 , Wei Yongjun wrote:
>>>
>>>>> On Apr 22, 2011, at 13:10 , Wei Yongjun wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>> Since the sender MUST NOT use the new IP address as a source for ANY SCTP
>>>>>>> packet except on carrying an ASCONF Chunk. And ASCONF chunk can be bundled.
>>>>>>> How about this change. If so, you do not need change to sctp_outq_tail();
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> diff --git a/net/sctp/outqueue.c b/net/sctp/outqueue.c
>>>>>>> index 1c88c89..bd6cc9c 100644
>>>>>>> --- a/net/sctp/outqueue.c
>>>>>>> +++ b/net/sctp/outqueue.c
>>>>>>> @@ -754,6 +754,13 @@ static int sctp_outq_flush(struct sctp_outq *q, int rtx_timeout)
>>>>>>> */
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> list_for_each_entry_safe(chunk, tmp, &q->control_chunk_list, list) {
>>>>>>> + /* RFC 5061, 5.3
>>>>>>> + * F1) This ...
>>>>>>> + */
>>>>>>> + if (q->asoc->src_out_of_asoc_ok &&
>>>>>>> + chunk->chunk_hdr->type != SCTP_CID_ASCONF)
>>>>>> SCTP_CID_ASCONF_ACK should be also allowed, the peer may
>>>>>> send ASCONF to do the same thing at the same time.
>>>>> Sorry for my bad understanding,
>>>>> Do you mean the situation: "the peer (ASCONF receiver) may send ASCONF-ACK to the unconfirmed destination"?
>>>>> Or do you mean following situation?
>>>>> 1. the pear sends ADD/DEL ASCONF to me,
>>>>> 2. I receive it,
>>>>> 3. I migrate to the other network and get new address,
>>>>> 4. I send ASCONF-ACK to the peer from the new address
>>>> Yes, If both side send ADD/DEL ASCONF to del the last one
>>>> address at the same time like this:
>>>>
>>>> ASCONF ----- ------ASCONF
>>>> (ADD/DEL) \ / (ADD/DEL)
>>>> \/
>>>> /\
>>>> <----/ \----->
>>>> ASCONF-ACK---\ /------ASCONF-ACK
>>>> \/
>>>> /\
>>>> <----/ \----->
>>>>
>>>> But I do not test for it. Not sure we need to do this, can you
>>>> check this before commit your new patchset?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>> + continue;
>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>> list_del_init(&chunk->list);
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> /* Pick the right transport to use. */
>>>>>>> @@ -881,6 +888,9 @@ static int sctp_outq_flush(struct sctp_outq *q, int rtx_timeout)
>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> + if (q->asoc->src_out_of_asoc_ok)
>>>>>>> + goto sctp_flush_out;
>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>> /* Is it OK to send data chunks? */
>>>>>>> switch (asoc->state) {
>>>>>>> case SCTP_STATE_COOKIE_ECHOED:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
>>>>>> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
>>>>>> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>>>>> --
>>>>> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
>>>>> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
>>>>> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
>>>> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
>>>> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-04-25 2:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-04-20 19:24 [PATCH net-next-2.6 v4 4/5] sctp: Add ASCONF operation on the single-homed host Michio Honda
2011-04-22 4:00 ` Wei Yongjun
2011-04-22 4:10 ` Wei Yongjun
2011-04-24 9:24 ` Michio Honda
2011-04-25 0:57 ` Wei Yongjun
2011-04-25 1:53 ` Michio Honda
2011-04-25 2:02 ` Wei Yongjun
2011-04-25 2:29 ` Michio Honda
2011-04-25 2:45 ` Wei Yongjun [this message]
2011-04-25 15:34 ` Michio Honda
2011-04-23 10:22 ` Michio Honda
2011-04-25 1:44 ` Wei Yongjun
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=4DB4E04C.70609@cn.fujitsu.com \
--to=yjwei@cn.fujitsu.com \
--cc=lksctp-developers@lists.sourceforge.net \
--cc=micchie@sfc.wide.ad.jp \
--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