From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Nov 26 05:14:12 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1C32216A468 for ; Mon, 26 Nov 2007 05:14:12 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ianf@clue.co.za) Received: from munchkin.clue.co.za (munchkin.clue.co.za [66.219.59.160]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D96D213C4E5 for ; Mon, 26 Nov 2007 05:14:11 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ianf@clue.co.za) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=simple; s=20070313; d=clue.co.za; h=Received:Received:Received:To:cc:From:Subject:In-Reply-To:X-Attribution:Date:Message-Id; b=pL5kILqEmM74s1ftPMti/Nd6rNRj8kHWTcHE8D1/zSd8YtaZrSp/u9ukdux6VRAmjdYgoeglxFQkYCdKMqp2P6Cx/7BbBfB1Dv9raAKDuduz89Ku0g32ifKYc1qcTAbO4wsKocfrHACNm+K1UsBH7pY+BeKH0Oh7QCzzkfAbFe8MjXJGnPeW+dS3PhscboQ/qXhSIi+SvwFb1hwF6CdDZmYU+H+2ZoobF1KietCuS0DvGi8ArFXUAerKOiTNcDIM; Received: from uucp by munchkin.clue.co.za with local-rmail (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1IwWIK-00069x-MQ; Mon, 26 Nov 2007 05:14:08 +0000 Received: from ianf.clue.co.za ([10.0.0.6] helo=clue.co.za) by urchin.clue.co.za with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1IwWHL-0000DR-Hn; Mon, 26 Nov 2007 05:13:07 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=clue.co.za) by clue.co.za with esmtp (Exim 4.68 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1IwWHK-0006dq-9N; Mon, 26 Nov 2007 07:13:06 +0200 To: Mike Silbersack From: Ian FREISLICH In-Reply-To: Message from Mike Silbersack of "Sun, 25 Nov 2007 04:13:30 CST." <20071125040951.B1206@odysseus.silby.com> X-Attribution: BOFH Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2007 07:13:06 +0200 Message-Id: Cc: current@freebsd.org, Kip Macy Subject: Re: TCP RST+data! X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2007 05:14:12 -0000 Mike Silbersack wrote: > > On Sun, 25 Nov 2007, Ian FREISLICH wrote: > > >>> I see. Playing around with net.inet.tcp sysctls, disabling delayed_ack > >>> fixes the problem with this phone. Do you think that this is a bug > >>> in the phone's TCP stack? > >>> > >> > >> Is there a proxy involved or is this session end-to-end? Not sure if > >> you described the setup but it might be useful (e.g. is the phone using > >> wireless). > > > > There the one connecting side was wireless, but it made no difference > > connecting over wired ethurnet end to end. There is no proxy > > involved. Both host and the phone are on the same subnet. > > Can you post a tcpdump of a successful connection with delayed_ack > disabled and then the same attempted (unsuccessful) connection with > delayed_ack reenabled? Please use -s 0 (to catch the entire packet) and > use -w to write the binary dump data to a file. That'll allow us to look > at the entire data payload. It's probably best to post those dumps on a > server somewhere and just post the urls to the list. net.inet.tcp.delayed_ack=0 net.inet.tcp.rfc1323=1 http://www.freislich.nom.za/phone.nodelayedack net.inet.tcp.delayed_ack=1 net.inet.tcp.rfc1323=1 http://www.freislich.nom.za/phone.delayedack net.inet.tcp.delayed_ack=1 net.inet.tcp.rfc1323=0 http://www.freislich.nom.za/phone.delayedack+norfc1323 All: this host is on the other end of *very* limited bandwidth connection, so don't hit it at once. Ian -- Ian Freislich