From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Daniel Borkmann Subject: Re: [PATCH net] sctp: partial chunk should be drop without sending abort packet Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2015 20:22:03 +0200 Message-ID: <55DB60CB.8030002@iogearbox.net> References: <88918657d985bc0e55e64ca232dcd5f2b76b7cb4.1440410910.git.lucien.xin@gmail.com> <20150824124713.GZ1097@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: network dev , davem@davemloft.net To: Marcelo Ricardo Leitner , Xin Long Return-path: Received: from www62.your-server.de ([213.133.104.62]:46789 "EHLO www62.your-server.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751235AbbHXSWI (ORCPT ); Mon, 24 Aug 2015 14:22:08 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20150824124713.GZ1097@localhost.localdomain> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 08/24/2015 02:47 PM, Marcelo Ricardo Leitner wrote: > On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 06:08:30PM +0800, Xin Long wrote: >> as RFC 4960, 6.10 said, *if the receiver detects a partial chunk, it MUST drop >> the chunk*, we should not send the abort. but if we put this discard to inside >> state machine, it will send abort. >> >> so we just drop the partial chunk there, never let this chunk go into the state >> machine. >> >> Signed-off-by: Xin Long >> --- > > This is basically reverting a chunk of Daniel's and Vlad's 26b87c788100 > ("net: sctp: fix remote memory pressure from excessive queueing") . > Isn't it going to re-introduce the initial issue then? Yes, seems so.