netdev - Re: [PATCH] TCP_FAILFAST: a new socket option to timeout/abort a connection quicker

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]

Date:	Tue, 24 Aug 2010 18:28:44 +0200
From:	Hagen Paul Pfeifer <hagen@...u.net>
To:	Arnd Hannemann <hannemann@...s.rwth-aachen.de>
Cc:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
	"H.K. Jerry Chu" <hkchu@...gle.com>, ilpo.jarvinen@...sinki.fi,
	davem@...emloft.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] TCP_FAILFAST: a new socket option to timeout/abort a
 connection quicker

* Arnd Hannemann | 2010-08-24 16:58:58 [+0200]:

>Nice, so did you come up with a name for the socket option yet?

+#define      TCP_UTO       18  /* User Timeout Option */

The patch is an early state and details as well as testing is a little bit
costly.

>Hmm, is there really a difference? If an application specifies
>a wanted timeout e.g. with USER_TIMEOUT, CHANGEABLE will
>become false and the value would be announced via ADV_UTO.
>The connection could be aborted locally after that time passed,
>regardless of what the remote site thinks the timeout should be.
>
>As I understand it U_LIMIT and L_LIMIT would only be there
>for safety to disallow nonsensical values of USER_TIMEOUT.
>
>Did I miss something?

Maybe not, aot sure. I must take a look at the patch from Jerry. I had no time
until now.

Hagen
--
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