[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <7d08dcfd-6ba0-f972-cee3-4fa0eff8c855@uls.co.za>
Date: Fri, 1 Apr 2022 13:54:33 +0200
From: Jaco Kroon <jaco@....co.za>
To: Florian Westphal <fw@...len.de>, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
Cc: Neal Cardwell <ncardwell@...gle.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
Yuchung Cheng <ycheng@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: linux 5.17.1 disregarding ACK values resulting in stalled TCP
connections
Hi,
On 2022/04/01 02:15, Florian Westphal wrote:
Incidently, I always find your initials to be interesting considering
(as far as I know) you work on netfilter firewall.
> Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com> wrote:
>> Next step would be to attempt removing _all_ firewalls, especially not
>> common setups like yours.
>>
>> conntrack had a bug preventing TFO deployment for a while, because
>> many boxes kept buggy kernel versions for years.
>>
>> 356d7d88e088687b6578ca64601b0a2c9d145296 netfilter: nf_conntrack: fix
>> tcp_in_window for Fast Open
> Jaco could also try with
> net.netfilter.nf_conntrack_tcp_be_liberal=1
>
> and, if that helps, with liberal=0 and
> sysctl net.netfilter.nf_conntrack_log_invalid=6
>
> (check dmesg/syslog/nflog).
Our core firewalls already had nf_conntrack_tcp_be_liberal for other
reasons (asymmetric routing combined with conntrackd left-over if I
recall), so maybe that's why it got through there ... don't exactly want
to just flip that setting though, is there a way to log if it would have
dropped anything, without actually dropping it (yet)?
Will do this first, first need to confirm that I can reproduce in a dev
environment.
Kind Regards,
Jaco
Powered by blists - more mailing lists