| 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
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2012 09:26:11 +0200 From: Saku Ytti <saku@...i.fi> To: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> Cc: rick.jones2@...com, netdev@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: TCP and reordering On (2012-11-27 21:06 -0500), David Miller wrote: > And the gains of fast retransmit far outweigh whatever strange > justification would give for reordering packets on purpose. I don't disagree. I'm not proposing to turn off fast retransmits. My proposal (or question more accurately) was to add 'reorder' counter to sockets, which would increment when duplicate ACK is followed by same sequence twice. Then you could automatically/dynamically delay duplicate acks, as you'd start to expect to receive the frames, out-of-order. Giving non-lossy reordering links pretty much 100% same performance as non-lossy in-order links. There are good amount of optimization in TCP for corner-case, and well that is what TCP stack does, tries to work with limitations imposed by network. My main question is, am I underestimating complexity needed to add such counter. Or does such counter actually already exist (I've not looked if netstat -s reordering counters are attributable to particular socket) -- ++ytti -- 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