netdev - Re: Fix FRTO+NewReno problem

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:	Mon, 12 May 2008 15:48:38 -0700 (PDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	ilpo.jarvinen@...sinki.fi
Cc:	damon@...tek.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Fix FRTO+NewReno problem

From: "Ilpo_Järvinen" <ilpo.jarvinen@...sinki.fi>
Date: Mon, 12 May 2008 22:12:47 +0300 (EEST)

> Then one question for DaveM:
> 
> What I'm not fully sure of, is do we want this workaround to be a sysctl 
> or unconditionally enabled which causes potentially up to two unnecessary 
> retransmissions? With SACK one or both of them will get SACKed before they 
> get retransmitted (both cases have common scenarios). (I made that 
> workaround patch for 2.6.24.1, so YMMV if you just plainly try to apply it 
> to net-2.6).

I think we will have to handle this behavior, unconditionally, all
the time.  Don't even add the sysctl.

If I understand correctly, it is only non-SACK newreno case that can
get the unnecessary retransmissions, right?  If so, it's not a big
deal at all.
--
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