From: Sebastian Kuzminsky <seb@highlab.com>
To: Philip Craig <philipc@snapgear.com>
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, Sebastian Kuzminsky <seb@highlab.com>
Subject: Re: bug in tcp?
Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2007 07:56:26 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <E1HdoAU-0001Ao-T8@highlab.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <46246572.9020108@snapgear.com>
Philip Craig <philipc@snapgear.com> wrote:
> Sebastian Kuzminsky wrote:
> > Weird. Why does sending a message from the client make it go again?
>
> The rule that allows packets with an "ESTABLISHED" state only matches
> packets for which the connection is in netfilter's conntrack table.
> The connection is removed from the table after the 5 days of idle.
> It is only added again if netfilter accepts a packet for that connection.
> So the packet from the client will cause it to be added.
Why did the packet from the client cause the connection to be added back
to the conntrack table, but the packet from the server did not?
> > How do people normally handle this?
>
> Change the timeout or use keepalives. I can't think of any other way.
> The 5 days is a compromise between keeping valid connections and
> timing out dead connections. There will always be connections for
> which it times out too fast or too slow. I don't think there are
> any drawbacks to increasing the timeout if you aren't a router,
> but as long as there is a timeout, you need keepalives to be sure.
Thanks! I'll add keepalives and rerun the tests, and I expect the
problem to go away.
--
Sebastian Kuzminsky
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-04-17 14:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-04-16 22:28 bug in tcp? Sebastian Kuzminsky
2007-04-16 22:50 ` Stephen Hemminger
2007-04-16 23:05 ` Sebastian Kuzminsky
2007-04-16 23:30 ` Stephen Hemminger
2007-04-17 4:19 ` Sebastian Kuzminsky
2007-04-17 4:30 ` John Heffner
2007-04-17 4:42 ` Sebastian Kuzminsky
2007-04-17 4:44 ` Philip Craig
2007-04-17 5:35 ` Sebastian Kuzminsky
2007-04-17 6:13 ` Philip Craig
2007-04-17 13:56 ` Sebastian Kuzminsky [this message]
2007-04-18 0:03 ` Philip Craig
2007-04-23 18:45 ` bug in my understanding (was Re: bug in tcp?) Sebastian Kuzminsky
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=E1HdoAU-0001Ao-T8@highlab.com \
--to=seb@highlab.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=philipc@snapgear.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).