netdev - Re: [PATCH] tcp: detect loss above high

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]

Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1201032059570.28487@melkinpaasi.cs.helsinki.fi>
Date:	Tue, 3 Jan 2012 21:11:11 +0200 (EET)
From:	"Ilpo Järvinen" <ilpo.jarvinen@...sinki.fi>
To:	Yuchung Cheng <ycheng@...gle.com>
cc:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, ncardwell@...gle.com,
	nanditad@...gle.com, Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] tcp: detect loss above high_seq in recovery

On Tue, 3 Jan 2012, Yuchung Cheng wrote:

> On Fri, Dec 30, 2011 at 3:19 AM, Ilpo Järvinen
> <ilpo.jarvinen@...sinki.fi> wrote:
> > On Thu, 29 Dec 2011, Yuchung Cheng wrote:
> >
> >> To summarize:
> >> 1) this change does NOT forbid TCP performing further CWR on new losses
> >> 2) this change (merely) marks some forward-retransmitted packets LOST.
> >> 3) the commit message is to be explicit that CWR may not always be performed,
> >>     in both my change and current kernel.
> >
> > I agree with these points. I wonder if you intend to look to fixing the
> > lacking CWR problem or should I look to that once I get some spare time?
> >
> >> HTH. I will update commit message if people can make sense of it :)
> >
> > Please do.
> Great, I'll update the commit message first, and work on another
> feature patch that does CWR if
> a) new sequence is lost
> b) a retransmission is lost

Ok, thanks. I think that it's better to do the way you suggest... ie., to 
do the cwr on detection rather than (possibly much) later when 
rexmitting.

-- 
 i.