From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Ramin Alidousti <ramin@cannon.eng.us.uu.net>
Subject: Re: detection of the third tcp packet in a tcp connection setup
Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2002 15:57:42 -0400
Sender: netfilter-admin@lists.samba.org
Message-ID: <20020627195742.GA31466@cannon.eng.us.uu.net>
References: <NJEFLNJDIFFNMHDEBKMJCEJADOAA.jpatterson@asgardgroup.com> <20020627193043.UMUP19225.mta07-svc.ntlworld.com@there> <20020627214407.F2890@oknodo.bof.de> <20020627194405.GLHF295.mta03-svc.ntlworld.com@there>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Return-path: <netfilter-admin@lists.samba.org>
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20020627194405.GLHF295.mta03-svc.ntlworld.com@there>
Errors-To: netfilter-admin@lists.samba.org
List-Help: <mailto:netfilter-request@lists.samba.org?subject=help>
List-Post: <mailto:netfilter@lists.samba.org>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.samba.org/listinfo/netfilter>,
	<mailto:netfilter-request@lists.samba.org?subject=subscribe>
List-Id: <netfilter.vger.kernel.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.samba.org/listinfo/netfilter>,
	<mailto:netfilter-request@lists.samba.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.samba.org/pipermail/netfilter/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: Antony Stone <Antony@Soft-Solutions.co.uk>
Cc: netfilter@lists.samba.org

On Thu, Jun 27, 2002 at 08:44:03PM +0100, Antony Stone wrote:

> On Thursday 27 June 2002 8:44 pm, Patrick Schaaf wrote:
> 
> > > > There are some distinguishing characteristics... it is the first packet
> > > > sent by the client that is in state ESTABLISHED.  it should have ACK
> > > > set and no other flags.  the tcp data length should be zero.
> > >
> > > Isn't that in itself a bit of a giveaway ?   I can't think of a reason
> > > why a zero-length packet should ever occur in the remainder of the data
> > > stream... ?
> >
> > How to TCP keepalive packets look like?
> 
> Hmmm.   Don't know.   Hadn't thought about those...
> 
> > Also, isn't it possible that the third packet already carries data, in the
> > general (read TCP protocol as it is written) case?
> 
> Well, I'd always thought that this was allowed, yes, but I've also been told 
> by several different people (who play with real-world networks all the time) 
> that it never happens in practice - you get:
> 

If I'm not wrong you can always send data even in SYN and SYN/ACK.
Like Patrick said the default options in the socket interface might
not do it but I thought I saw some tweaking in one of Richard Steven's
(god bless his soul) books to push traffic in SYN packets.

Ramin

> SYN (no data)
> SYN/ACK (no data)
> ACK (no data)
> ACK (data)
> ACK (data)
> etc.....