[<prev] [next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140116093454.3880cb4c@nehalam.linuxnetplumber.net>
Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2014 09:34:54 -0800
From: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@...workplumber.org>
To: netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Fw: [Bug 68821] New: splittcp with tproxy has issues when timestamp
is enabled
Begin forwarded message:
Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2014 05:39:52 -0800
From: "bugzilla-daemon@...zilla.kernel.org" <bugzilla-daemon@...zilla.kernel.org>
To: "stephen@...workplumber.org" <stephen@...workplumber.org>
Subject: [Bug 68821] New: splittcp with tproxy has issues when timestamp is enabled
https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=68821
Bug ID: 68821
Summary: splittcp with tproxy has issues when timestamp is
enabled
Product: Networking
Version: 2.5
Kernel Version: 3.2
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
Tree: Mainline
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P1
Component: IPV4
Assignee: shemminger@...ux-foundation.org
Reporter: shailendra7479@...il.com
Regression: No
Hi,
I am having an application which does splittcp with transparency. I have a NAT
box which reuses the 5-tuple frequently. Due to this there is a possibility
that some connections with the same tuple go through our splittcp and some may
go directly to the webserver.
Due to this, the webserver is getting confused and not responding with
SYN-ACKs.
Is there a way to enable transparency in TIMESTAMPs when tproxy is involved for
eg., preserve the incoming timestamp in the outgoing SYN.
Shouldn't the kernel be using the client's timestamp in the outgoing SYNs when
transparency is enabled?
Thanks
Shailendra
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
--
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