linux-kernel - Re: TCP fast retransmit

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]

Message-ID: <1322217767.2403.2.camel@edumazet-HP-Compaq-6005-Pro-SFF-PC>
Date:	Fri, 25 Nov 2011 11:42:47 +0100
From:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To:	"Esztermann, Ansgar" <Ansgar.Esztermann@...-bpc.mpg.de>
Cc:	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: TCP fast retransmit

Le vendredi 25 novembre 2011 à 10:42 +0100, Esztermann, Ansgar a écrit :
> Hello list,
> 
> is there some documentation available on TCP fast retransmit? There
> seem to be quite a lot of descriptions -- from informal to scholarly
> papers -- on the various algorithms available to calculate the proper
> size of the congestion window, but I have been unable so far to find
> out *when* a fast retransmit is triggered. RFC 2581 states the third
> dupACK "should" do it, and this seems to be quoted fairly often.
> However, I can easily produce connections that fail to perform fast
> retransmit even after 5 dupACKs. Some people mention Linux uses a
> different (presumable more sophisticated) algorithm to trigger fast
> retransmits, but no-one seems to elaborate.
> 
I believe the RFC you gave should be the ground to your question.

Could you provide a trace showing what you believe is a violation of the
standards ?



--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/