[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20170117.155226.1285167033562007741.davem@davemloft.net>
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2017 15:52:26 -0500 (EST)
From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To: jbaron@...mai.com
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, edumazet@...gle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] tcp: accept RST for rcv_nxt - 1 after
receiving a FIN
From: Jason Baron <jbaron@...mai.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2017 13:37:19 -0500
> From: Jason Baron <jbaron@...mai.com>
>
> Using a Mac OSX box as a client connecting to a Linux server, we have found
> that when certain applications (such as 'ab'), are abruptly terminated
> (via ^C), a FIN is sent followed by a RST packet on tcp connections. The
> FIN is accepted by the Linux stack but the RST is sent with the same
> sequence number as the FIN, and Linux responds with a challenge ACK per
> RFC 5961. The OSX client then sometimes (they are rate-limited) does not
> reply with any RST as would be expected on a closed socket.
>
> This results in sockets accumulating on the Linux server left mostly in
> the CLOSE_WAIT state, although LAST_ACK and CLOSING are also possible.
> This sequence of events can tie up a lot of resources on the Linux server
> since there may be a lot of data in write buffers at the time of the RST.
> Accepting a RST equal to rcv_nxt - 1, after we have already successfully
> processed a FIN, has made a significant difference for us in practice, by
> freeing up unneeded resources in a more expedient fashion.
>
> A packetdrill test demonstrating the behavior:
...
> Signed-off-by: Jason Baron <jbaron@...mai.com>
Applied, thanks Jason.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists