lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2020]   [Jun]   [30]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [regression] TCP_MD5SIG on established sockets
----- On Jun 30, 2020, at 4:56 PM, Eric Dumazet edumazet@google.com wrote:

> On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 1:44 PM David Miller <davem@davemloft.net> wrote:
>>
>> From: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>
>> Date: Tue, 30 Jun 2020 13:39:27 -0700
>>
>> > The (C) & (B) case are certainly doable.
>> >
>> > A) case is more complex, I have no idea of breakages of various TCP
>> > stacks if a flow got SACK
>> > at some point (in 3WHS) but suddenly becomes Reno.
>>
>> I agree that C and B are the easiest to implement without having to
>> add complicated code to handle various negotiated TCP option
>> scenerios.
>>
>> It does seem to be that some entities do A, or did I misread your
>> behavioral analysis of various implementations Mathieu?
>>
>> Thanks.
>
> Yes, another question about Mathieu cases is do determine the behavior
> of all these stacks vs :
> SACK option
> TCP TS option.

I will ask my customer's networking team to investigate these behaviors,
which will allow me to prepare a thorough reply to the questions raised
by Eric and David. I expect to have an answer within 2-3 weeks at most.

Thank you!

Mathieu

--
Mathieu Desnoyers
EfficiOS Inc.
http://www.efficios.com

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2020-06-30 23:19    [W:0.074 / U:0.372 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site