netdev - Re: two other cases Re: [Bug 11721] after upgrade to 2.6.27 i cannot navigate

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: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0810211423350.7072@wrl-59.cs.helsinki.fi>
Date:	Tue, 21 Oct 2008 15:18:57 +0300 (EEST)
From:	"Ilpo Järvinen" <ilpo.jarvinen@...sinki.fi>
To:	Jarek Poplawski <jarkao2@...il.com>
cc:	Aldo Maggi <sentiniate@...cali.it>,
	Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, bugme-daemon@...zilla.kernel.org
Subject: Re: two other cases Re: [Bug 11721] after upgrade to 2.6.27 i	cannot
 navigate

On Tue, 21 Oct 2008, Jarek Poplawski wrote:

> On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 01:51:10PM +0300, Ilpo Järvinen wrote:
> > On Tue, 21 Oct 2008, Jarek Poplawski wrote:
> > 
> > > On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 12:36:33PM +0300, Ilpo Järvinen wrote:
> > > ...
> > > > Can you try this another debug patch below (on 2.6.27.2 is fine). It moves 
> > > > the mss to the last position but should keep timestamps in place by making 
> > > > wscale as first option. It is well possible that you won't get it working 
> > > > at all except with all ts,sack and wscale set to 0 (the most likely 
> > > > result). Please try with all wscale,sack,ts combinations (no need to 
> > > > provide dumps, just working/not working per case)... This should 
> > > > tell us for quite high certaintity what is the actual option which is 
> > > > causing this (would it not be the mss-at-beginning which is the most 
> > > > likely cause), [...]
> > > 
> > > I'd like to remind it seems to work with only sack off, so mss after
> > > ts. If so, my suspicion would be around rfc's/options' dating?
> > 
> > Thanks, I missed that case... there are so many cases already... :-)
> > ...I'm not sure we'll find some very obvious reason for this, rfc dating 
> > probably has very little to do here.
> > 
> > I still think that putting an alternative option in front is useful test 
> > (though my initial mss-at-beginning thought wasn't bullet-proof) but 
> > maybe we could skip all those alternative settings of wscale,sack,ts and 
> > have them just all enabled.
> 
> I agree with you, but when this test with all options enabled fails
> (?!), IMHO disabling sack only could be enough to get it working
> again.

...Yes it should, but we could be all wrong and it just works with them 
all too :-).


-- 
 i.