[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20100106.165933.226786062.davem@davemloft.net>
Date: Wed, 06 Jan 2010 16:59:33 -0800 (PST)
From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To: ilpo.jarvinen@...sinki.fi
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, nhorman@...driver.com
Subject: Re: BSD 4.2 style TCP keepalives
From: "Ilpo Järvinen" <ilpo.jarvinen@...sinki.fi>
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 2010 02:34:51 +0200 (EET)
> On Wed, 6 Jan 2010, David Miller wrote:
>
>> 3) tcp_data_queue() should make it to, and hit, this conditional:
>>
>> if (!after(TCP_SKB_CB(skb)->end_seq, tp->rcv_nxt)) {
>>
>> which will schedule an ACK the same exact way we would if
>> tcp_sequence() rejected the sequence range.
>>
>> So it's a mystery why we aren't responding to Windows 2000's
>> BSD 4.2 style zero window probes.
>>
>> Can someone please validate my analysis?
>
> In 3) I don't see why we'd hit that one as peer's snd_una+1 would be
> larger than rcv_nxt.
Peer constructs keepalive packet using sequence [snd.una-1,snd.una],
both of which are <= rcv_nxt
--
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