netdev - Re: [PATCH 2/2] [TCP] FRTO: work-around inorder receivers

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 13 May 2008 02:54:38 -0700 (PDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	ilpo.jarvinen@...sinki.fi
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org, damon@...tek.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] [TCP] FRTO: work-around inorder receivers

From: "Ilpo_Järvinen" <ilpo.jarvinen@...sinki.fi>
Date: Tue, 13 May 2008 12:43:54 +0300

> If receiver consumes segments successfully only in-order, FRTO
> fallback to conventional recovery produces RTO loop because
> FRTO's forward transmissions will always get dropped and need to
> be resent, yet by default they're not marked as lost (which are
> the only segments we will retransmit in CA_Loss).
> 
> Price to pay about this is occassionally unnecessarily
> retransmitting the forward transmission(s). SACK blocks help
> a bit to avoid this, so it's mainly a concern for NewReno case
> though SACK is not fully immune either.
> 
> This change has a side-effect of fixing SACKFRTO problem where
> it didn't have snd_nxt of the RTO time available anymore when
> fallback become necessary (this problem would have only occured
> when RTO would occur for two or more segments and ECE arrives
> in step 3; no need to figure out how to fix that unless the
> TODO item of selective behavior is considered in future).
> 
> Signed-off-by: Ilpo Järvinen <ilpo.jarvinen@...sinki.fi>
> Reported-by: Damon L. Chesser <damon@...tek.com>
> Tested-by: Damon L. Chesser <damon@...tek.com>

Also applied, thanks!
--
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