[<prev] [next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140327090202.673380a1@samsung-9>
Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2014 09:02:02 -0700
From: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@...workplumber.org>
To: netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Fw: [Bug 73021] New: TCP_USER_TIMEOUT not working when interface is
taken down, e.g. cable unplugged
Begin forwarded message:
Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2014 05:49:28 -0700
From: "bugzilla-daemon@...zilla.kernel.org" <bugzilla-daemon@...zilla.kernel.org>
To: "stephen@...workplumber.org" <stephen@...workplumber.org>
Subject: [Bug 73021] New: TCP_USER_TIMEOUT not working when interface is taken down, e.g. cable unplugged
https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=73021
Bug ID: 73021
Summary: TCP_USER_TIMEOUT not working when interface is taken
down, e.g. cable unplugged
Product: Networking
Version: 2.5
Kernel Version: 3.4.24 and 3.11.0
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
Tree: Mainline
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P1
Component: IPV4
Assignee: shemminger@...ux-foundation.org
Reporter: pelle.johnsen@...il.com
Regression: No
When the network interface is taken down (in this case eth0 plugging out cable)
an established socket goes to zero window probing state (netstat -o shows
unkn-4). This state ignores TCP_USER_TIMEOUT (and any keep-alive timeouts) and
result is that socket takes ~12 min. to timeout instead of what is specified
with TCP_USER_TIMEOUT.
There seems to be 2 'issues':
1. Why does socket go to zero window probing in this case?
2. Why does zero window probing not respect TCP_USER_TIMEOUT?
Expected behavior:
TCP_USER_TIMEOUT can be used to limit how long it takes a socket to timeout.
--
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