From owner-freebsd-current Mon Jan 15 14:45:12 1996 Return-Path: owner-current Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) id OAA15975 for current-outgoing; Mon, 15 Jan 1996 14:45:12 -0800 (PST) Received: from apollo.COSC.GOV (root@apollo.COSC.GOV [198.94.103.34]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) with ESMTP id OAA15967 for ; Mon, 15 Jan 1996 14:45:06 -0800 (PST) Received: (from vince@localhost) by apollo.COSC.GOV (8.7.3/8.6.9) id OAA13331; Mon, 15 Jan 1996 14:44:52 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 15 Jan 1996 14:44:51 -0800 (PST) From: -Vince- To: Andras Olah cc: Robert Sanders , freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: finger problem going from 2.1R to -current In-Reply-To: <3107.821742863@curie.cs.utwente.nl> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-current@freebsd.org Precedence: bulk On Mon, 15 Jan 1996, Andras Olah wrote: > On Mon, 15 Jan 1996 15:17:30 EST, Robert Sanders wrote: > > On Mon, 15 Jan 1996 04:14:01 EST, Andras Olah said: > > > > > machines is caused by the use of T/TCP. Apparently some (buggy or > > > at least non-conformant) TCP stacks have problems with T/TCP. > > > > AIX and Linux both have problems with it. Solaris copes fine. > > > [...] > > It's short, so I'll just post it here. Both rfc1323 and rfc1644 are > > set to 0 on my machine. > > > > 15:13:10.980335 hrothgar.1081 > widow.finger: SFP 100905540:100905550(10) win 17520 (DF) > > 15:13:16.608004 hrothgar.1081 > widow.finger: SFP 100905540:100905550(10) win 17520 (DF) > > 15:13:40.608362 hrothgar.1081 > widow.finger: SFP 100905540:100905550(10) win 17520 (DF) > > > > AIX 4.1.2 doesn't seem to like packets with SYN and FIN that also > > include data. > > > > For those of you that want to work around the problem, changing all > > occurrences of MSG_EOF in src/usr.bin/finger/net.c to 0 should do it. > > > > -- Robert > > Paul Traina mentioned the same problem (sending of SYN,data,FIN even > when rfc1644 is off) a few days ago. The real fix is a patch to > sys/netinet/tcp_output.c to make our TCP more conservative when no > extensions are used. I've included the patch below and plan to commit > it, but I'm waiting for feedback from the networking guys because I > couldn't try this patch on a current machine. On 2.1R it seems to do > its job well. I'd welcome if some people could try that patch before I > commit it. When are you planning to commit it since if it's a kernel patch, I will have to wait until tomorrow... Cheers, -Vince- vince@COSC.GOV - GUS Mailing Lists Admin - http://www.COSC.GOV/~vince UC Berkeley AstroPhysics - Electrical Engineering (Honorary B.S.) Chabot Observatory & Science Center - Board of Advisors Running FreeBSD - Real UN*X for Free! Linda Wong/Vivian Chow/Hacken Lee/Danny Chan/Priscilla Chan Fan Club Mailing Lists Admin