netdev - Re: TCP socket receives strange packet

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

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <20141014.123259.185699262217339879.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:	Tue, 14 Oct 2014 12:32:59 -0400 (EDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	eric.dumazet@...il.com
Cc:	Yurij.Plotnikov@...etlabs.ru, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	Alexandra.Kossovsky@...etlabs.ru
Subject: Re: TCP socket receives strange packet

From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2014 08:00:52 -0700

> On Tue, 2014-10-14 at 18:09 +0400, Yurij M. Plotnikov wrote:
>> Connected TCP socket receives packet without timestamps option which 
>> exists in SYN, SYNACK and ACK. It is packet 4 in attached tcpdump output.
>> 
>> tcpdump output description: The host has address 10.208.10.1 (server) 
>> and the peer host has address 10.208.10.2 (client).
>> 
>> Establishing connection: Timestamps option exists in SYN, SYNACK and ACK 
>> (packets 1, 2 and 3 in attached file), so accepted socket should receive 
>> packets only with timestamps option.
> 
> Can you point the RFC paragraph stating so ?

There is no requirement that timestamps be present just because they
were successfuly negoatiated during the handshake.

This has been brought up before several times.
--
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