[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1338469463.7747.167.camel@localhost>
Date: Thu, 31 May 2012 15:04:23 +0200
From: Jesper Dangaard Brouer <jbrouer@...hat.com>
To: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Cc: christoph.paasch@...ouvain.be, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Martin Topholm <mph@...h.dk>, Florian Westphal <fw@...len.de>,
Hans Schillstrom <hans.schillstrom@...csson.com>,
Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/2] Faster/parallel SYN handling to mitigate SYN
floods
On Thu, 2012-05-31 at 14:58 +0200, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> On Thu, 2012-05-31 at 14:51 +0200, Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote:
> > On Thu, 2012-05-31 at 00:40 +0200, Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote:
> > > That seems like a very unlikely situation, which we perhaps should
> > > neglect as we are under SYN attack.
> > >
> > > I will test the attack vector, if we instead of dropping the reqsk,
> > > fall back into the slow locked path.
> >
> > I can provoke this attack vector, and performance is worse, if not
> > dropping the reqsk early.
> >
> > Generator SYN flood at 750Kpps, sending false retransmits mixture.
> >
> > - With early drop: 406 Kpps
> > - With return to locked processing: 251 Kpps
> >
> > Its still better than the approx 150Kpps, without any patches.
> >
>
> How many different IP addresses are used by your generator ?
In this attack I reduced the IPs to 255, and also the source port
numbers, and then simply cloned some of the SKBs. But normally I use
65535 IPs 198.18.0.0/16 (the range reserved for benchmarking).
> Or maybe you disabled IP route cache ?
Why do you think I have disabled the IP dst route cache?
--
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