netdev - Re: SACK scoreboard

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 08 Jan 2008 23:58:33 -0800 (PST)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	ilpo.jarvinen@...sinki.fi
Cc:	lachlan.andrew@...il.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	quetchen@...tech.edu
Subject: Re: SACK scoreboard

From: "Ilpo_Järvinen" <ilpo.jarvinen@...sinki.fi>
Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2008 14:12:47 +0200 (EET)

> If I'd hint my boss that I'm involved in something like this I'd
> bet that he also would get quite crazy... ;-) I'm partially paid
> for making TCP more RFCish :-), or at least that the places where
> thing diverge are known and controllable for research purposes.

RFCs are great guides by which to implement things, but they have been
often completely wrong or not practicle to follow strictly.

The handling of out of order ACKs with timestamps is my favorite
example.  Nobody performs an RFC compliant timestamp check on ACK
packets, or else their performance would go into the toilet during
packet reordering.

The URG bit setting is another one.

Especially when, practically speaking, we can in fact make changes
like I believe we can here I think we should.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html