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
| ||
|
Message-Id: <35088ECA-4FBF-47E9-8590-022B45A7F33D@earthlink.net> Date: Thu, 9 Sep 2010 22:29:15 -0700 From: Mitchell Erblich <erblichs@...thlink.net> To: MK <stardust496@...il.com> Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: empty ack packets MK, The 1st packet is probably generating window update information. If the TCP flow is in slow start, it should not be doing any delacks to keep as many normal acks in the flow. Mitchell Erblich On Sep 9, 2010, at 10:12 PM, MK wrote: > Hello list, > > I am looking at a tcpdump and I see that very very frequently, after > receiving a segment, my tcp is sending an empty ack back in a matter > of several (around 20 - 50) microseconds. And then after several more > microseconds, my tcp is sending some valid outgoing data. I am trying > to understand why it decided to send an empty ack back when that ack > could potentially have been delayed by microseconds and get > piggybacked on the outgoing data. > > From the code, it appears that the delayed ack timeout is 40 millisecs > so it is likely not the delack timer that is causing this. (And I do > not have the quickack option) > > This is RHEL5 (2.6.18) kernel. > > Does anybody have an idea as to what is happening? > > Thanks a lot!! > -- > 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 -- 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