From: Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@netfilter.org>
To: Sriram Yagnaraman <sriram.yagnaraman@est.tech>
Cc: "netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org"
<netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org>,
Florian Westphal <fw@strlen.de>,
Marcelo Ricardo Leitner <mleitner@redhat.com>,
Long Xin <lxin@redhat.com>,
Claudio Porfiri <claudio.porfiri@ericsson.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] netfilter: conntrack: simplify sctp state machine
Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2023 01:50:21 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Y7dwTU9Ky6RN1u7L@salvia> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <DBBP189MB14337144265DA856B8321D1695FA9@DBBP189MB1433.EURP189.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>
On Thu, Jan 05, 2023 at 12:11:44PM +0000, Sriram Yagnaraman wrote:
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@netfilter.org>
> > Sent: Thursday, 5 January 2023 12:54
> > To: Sriram Yagnaraman <sriram.yagnaraman@est.tech>
> > Cc: netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org; Florian Westphal <fw@strlen.de>;
> > Marcelo Ricardo Leitner <mleitner@redhat.com>; Long Xin
> > <lxin@redhat.com>; Claudio Porfiri <claudio.porfiri@ericsson.com>
> > Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] netfilter: conntrack: simplify sctp state machine
> >
> > On Thu, Jan 05, 2023 at 11:41:13AM +0000, Sriram Yagnaraman wrote:
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@netfilter.org>
> > > > Sent: Wednesday, 4 January 2023 16:02
> > > > To: Sriram Yagnaraman <sriram.yagnaraman@est.tech>
> > > > Cc: netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org; Florian Westphal
> > > > <fw@strlen.de>; Marcelo Ricardo Leitner <mleitner@redhat.com>; Long
> > > > Xin <lxin@redhat.com>
> > > > Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] netfilter: conntrack: simplify sctp state
> > > > machine
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Jan 04, 2023 at 12:31:43PM +0100, Sriram Yagnaraman wrote:
> > > > > All the paths in an SCTP connection are kept alive either by
> > > > > actual DATA/SACK running through the connection or by HEARTBEAT.
> > > > > This patch proposes a simple state machine with only two states
> > > > > OPEN_WAIT and ESTABLISHED (similar to UDP). The reason for this
> > > > > change is a full stateful approach to SCTP is difficult when the
> > > > > association is multihomed since the endpoints could use different
> > > > > paths in the network during the lifetime of an association.
> > > >
> > > > Do you mean the router/firewall might not see all packets for
> > > > association is multihomed?
> > > >
> > > > Could you please provide an example?
> > >
> > > Let's say the primary and alternate/secondary paths between the SCTP
> > > endpoints traverse different middle boxes. If an SCTP endpoint detects
> > > network failure on the primary path, it will switch to using the
> > > secondary path and all subsequent packets will not be seen by the
> > > middlebox on the primary path, including SHUTDOWN sequences if they
> > > happen at that time.
> >
> > OK, then on the primary middle box the SCTP flow will just timeout?
> > (because no more packets are seen).
>
> Yes, they will timeout unless the primary path comes up before the
> SHUTDOWN sequence. And the default timeout for an ESTABLISHED SCTP
> connection is 5 days, which is a "long" time to clean-up this entry.
Does the middle box have a chance to see any packet that provides a
hint to shorten this timeout? no HEARTBEAT packets are seen in this
case on the former primary path?
What I am missing are a more detailed list of issues with the existing
approach. Your patch description says "SCTP tracking with multihoming
is difficult", probably a list of scenarios would help to understand
the motivation to simplify the state machine.
Thanks.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-01-06 0:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-01-04 11:31 [RFC PATCH] netfilter: conntrack: simplify sctp state machine Sriram Yagnaraman
2023-01-04 12:41 ` Florian Westphal
2023-01-05 11:25 ` Sriram Yagnaraman
2023-01-04 15:02 ` Pablo Neira Ayuso
2023-01-05 11:41 ` Sriram Yagnaraman
2023-01-05 11:53 ` Pablo Neira Ayuso
2023-01-05 12:11 ` Sriram Yagnaraman
2023-01-06 0:50 ` Pablo Neira Ayuso [this message]
2023-01-11 9:36 ` Sriram Yagnaraman
2023-01-11 13:53 ` Marcelo Ricardo Leitner
2023-01-12 11:38 ` Sriram Yagnaraman
2023-01-12 11:50 ` Pablo Neira Ayuso
2023-01-13 9:04 ` Sriram Yagnaraman
2023-01-16 9:37 ` Sriram Yagnaraman
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=Y7dwTU9Ky6RN1u7L@salvia \
--to=pablo@netfilter.org \
--cc=claudio.porfiri@ericsson.com \
--cc=fw@strlen.de \
--cc=lxin@redhat.com \
--cc=mleitner@redhat.com \
--cc=netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sriram.yagnaraman@est.tech \
/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