[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAFbMe2Pgjbttt+Z3RQ9KL05=GHqZYk5ubNH2G1-EUn_f_RBaEQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2012 21:34:17 -0700
From: "H.K. Jerry Chu" <hkjerry.chu@...il.com>
To: Alexander Bergmann <alex@...lab.net>
Cc: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, eric.dumazet@...il.com,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] tcp: Wrong timeout for SYN segments
On Sat, Aug 25, 2012 at 1:48 AM, Alexander Bergmann <alex@...lab.net> wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 24, 2012 at 01:42:31PM -0400, David Miller wrote:
>> Alex, this patch doesn't apply, it was completely corrupted by your email
>> client.
>>
>> Make a fresh submission, with this fixed. But before you do, email the
>> patch to yourself and make sure you can actually apply the patch you
>> receive in your inbox. Because that's exactly what I'm going to have
>> to do.
>
> Sorry I messed it up the last time. This time I've double checked as
> you suggested. I'll keep that in mind.
>
> From 11a292b1cff772f930a02fda02d5b741f8ea5033 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Alexander Bergmann <alex@...lab.net>
> Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2012 14:09:49 +0200
> Subject: [PATCH 1/1] tcp: Increase timeout for SYN segments
>
> Commit 9ad7c049 changed the initRTO from 3secs to 1sec in accordance to
> RFC6298 (former RFC2988bis). This reduced the time till the last SYN
> retransmission packet gets sent from 93secs to 31secs.
>
> RFC1122 is stating that the retransmission should be done for at least 3
> minutes, but this seems to be quite high.
>
> "However, the values of R1 and R2 may be different for SYN
> and data segments. In particular, R2 for a SYN segment MUST
> be set large enough to provide retransmission of the segment
> for at least 3 minutes. The application can close the
> connection (i.e., give up on the open attempt) sooner, of
> course."
>
> This patch increases the value of TCP_SYN_RETRIES to the value of 6,
> providing a retransmission window of 63secs.
>
> The comments for SYN and SYNACK retries have also been updated to
> describe the current settings.
>
> Signed-off-by: Alexander Bergmann <alex@...lab.net>
> ---
> include/net/tcp.h | 18 ++++++++++++++----
> 1 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/net/tcp.h b/include/net/tcp.h
> index 1f000ff..d43d6b3 100644
> --- a/include/net/tcp.h
> +++ b/include/net/tcp.h
> @@ -98,11 +98,21 @@ extern void tcp_time_wait(struct sock *sk, int state, int timeo);
> * 15 is ~13-30min depending on RTO.
> */
>
> -#define TCP_SYN_RETRIES 5 /* number of times to retry active opening a
> - * connection: ~180sec is RFC minimum */
> +#define TCP_SYN_RETRIES 6 /*
> + * This is how many retries it does to active
> + * opening a connection.
> + * RFC1122 says the minimum retry MUST be at
> + * least 180secs. Nevertheless this value is
> + * corresponding to 63secs of retransmission
> + * with the current initial RTO.
> + */
>
> -#define TCP_SYNACK_RETRIES 5 /* number of times to retry passive opening a
> - * connection: ~180sec is RFC minimum */
> +#define TCP_SYNACK_RETRIES 5 /*
> + * This is how may retries it does to passive
> + * opening a connection.
> + * This is corresponding to 31secs of
> + * retransmission with the current initial RTO.
IMHO 31secs seem a little short. Why not change it to 6 as well because 63
secs still beats 93secs with 3sec initRTO and 5 retries.
Jerry
> + */
>
> #define TCP_TIMEWAIT_LEN (60*HZ) /* how long to wait to destroy TIME-WAIT
> * state, about 60 seconds */
> --
> 1.7.8.6
>
--
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