[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1501079532.12695.17.camel@edumazet-glaptop3.roam.corp.google.com>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2017 07:32:12 -0700
From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To: Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>
Cc: Klavs Klavsen <kl@...n.dk>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: TCP fast retransmit issues
On Wed, 2017-07-26 at 15:42 +0200, Willy Tarreau wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 26, 2017 at 06:31:21AM -0700, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> > On Wed, 2017-07-26 at 14:18 +0200, Klavs Klavsen wrote:
> > > the 192.168.32.44 is a Centos 7 box.
> >
> > Could you grab a capture on this box, to see if the bogus packets are
> > sent by it, or later mangled by a middle box ?
>
> Given the huge difference between the window and the ranges of the
> values in the SACK field, I'm pretty sure there's a firewall doing
> some sequence numbers randomization in the middle, not aware of SACK
> and not converting these ones. I've had to disable such broken
> features more than once in field after similar observations! Probably
> that the Mac doesn't advertise SACK support and doesn't experience the
> problem.
We need to check RFC if such invalid SACK blocks should be ignored (DUP
ACK would be processed and trigger fast retransmit anyway), or strongly
validated (as I suspect we currently do), leading to a total freeze.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists