[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0810202323330.30254@wrl-59.cs.helsinki.fi>
Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2008 23:55:48 +0300 (EEST)
From: "Ilpo Järvinen" <ilpo.jarvinen@...sinki.fi>
To: Aldo Maggi <sentiniate@...cali.it>
cc: Jarek Poplawski <jarkao2@...il.com>,
Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: tcp_sack problem Re: [Bug 11721] after upgrade to 2.6.27 i cannot
navigate
On Mon, 20 Oct 2008, Aldo Maggi wrote:
> i repeat here what i wrote there:
>
> Ilpo,
> i'm sending herewith attached the output of
> tcpdump -i eth0 -nXX -c3 'dst port 80 and tcp-syn != 0' on topolino when:
> 1) kernel 2.6.26.6 is running on paperino and tcp_window_scaling,
> tcp_timestamps, tcp_sack are set to "1"
> 2) kernel 2.6.26.6 is running on paperino and tcp_window_scaling,
> tcp_timestamps, tcp_sack are set to "0"
> 3) kernel 2.6.27-rc1-git1 is running on paperino and tcp_window_scaling,
> tcp_timestamps, tcp_sack are set to "1"
> 4) kernel 2.6.27-rc1-git1 is running on paperino and tcp_window_scaling,
> tcp_timestamps, tcp_sack are set to "0"
Thanks, very unambiquously being told what each case is, helps a lot... :-)
Difference is: ip checksum, ipid, lsb of dstaddr, sport, seqno, tcp
checksum, timestamp. Plus the option reordering as discussed before. Here
are the options:
28 0204 <
29 05b4 <
30 0402 0402
31 080a 080a
32 0019 | ffff
33 db30 | 8169
34 0000 0000
35 0000 0000
36 > 0204
37 > 05b4
38 0103 0103
39 0306 0306
Could you try if tcp_window_scaling=1, tcp_sack=1, tcp_timestamps=0 also
works, if you didn't already (it's not that obvious from the earlier
acknowledgement you gave that these were the exact options you used or
not)...
> moreover, i read more carefully what you and Jarek wrote above, please let me
> know if you deem still necessary that i apply the patch you provided and
> compile or if you like i compile the latest kernel or whatever.
If that ws=1,s=1,ts=0 test succeeds, then testing my patch would be useful
too. Anyway it seems that we're dealing with some violation of spec here
(by either the peer or some middle node, 2.6.27-whatever is not doing
something outside of spec), just trying to narrow down which of the
options is the actual cause. We might need to try later some other
ordering of options too to rule out possibilities by trial-and-error
(ie., unless you have a better knowledge about the devices on the path,
information which I sort of expect to be out of (y)our reach :-)).
--
i.
--
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
Powered by blists - more mailing lists