netdev - Re: [PATCH] [RFC] IPv4 TCP fails to send window scale option when window scale is zero

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:	Thu, 01 Oct 2009 11:39:43 +0200
From:	Gilad Ben-Yossef <gilad@...efidence.com>
To:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
CC:	Ilpo Järvinen <ilpo.jarvinen@...sinki.fi>,
	Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, Ori Finkalman <ori@...sleep.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] [RFC] IPv4 TCP fails to send window scale option when
 window scale is zero

Eric Dumazet wrote:

>
>>>
>>> Your version slows down the tcp_options_write() function, once per tx packet.
>>>       
>> Are you serious that anding would cost that much? :-/
>>     
>
> Not really :)
>   
LOL I was trying very hard to understand why you thought this was such 
an issue. My head was flying into all sorts of weird directions like 
cache effects and the like... ;-)

<snip>
> Yes, wscale 0 is RFC valid, but are we sure some equipment wont play funny games
> with such value ? At least sending "wscale 1-14" must be working...
>   
Well, there at least used to be routers that would actually zeroed the 
WS value in transit while leaving the option set, but this is another 
issue of course.

Anyway, I know Vista at least does set the window scale TCP option by 
default. One assumes they occasionally send a zero value scale. Not that 
Vista is such a good benchmark to compare Linux to but at least I tend 
to believe the issue would have popped up if it is common enough.

I can craft a patch to introduce a route table option to set TCP window 
scale minimum and maximum sizes, similar to window size route option, if 
you there is a need for that. Personally, I think it is just overkill.
>
> My quick&dirty patch was only for discussion, I have no strong opinion on it,
> only that was on one place to patch instead of two/three/four I dont know yet.
>
> So please Gilad & Ori send us a new patch :)
>
>   
Revised patch follows in next email.

Gilad

   

-- 
Gilad Ben-Yossef
Chief Coffee Drinker & CTO
Codefidence Ltd.

Web:   http://codefidence.com
Cell:  +972-52-8260388
Skype: gilad_codefidence
Tel:   +972-8-9316883 ext. 201
Fax:   +972-8-9316884
Email: gilad@...efidence.com

Check out our Open Source technology and training blog - http://tuxology.net

	"Now the world has gone to bed
	 Darkness won't engulf my head
	 I can see by infra-red
	 How I hate the night."

--
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