Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 16 Feb 2021 11:58:04 +0000
From:      bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org
To:        ipfw@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   [Bug 253476] ipfw keepalive: tcp_do_segment: Timestamp missing, segment silently dropped
Message-ID:  <bug-253476-8303-WcJVZIYWbb@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-253476-8303@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
References:  <bug-253476-8303@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D253476

--- Comment #11 from Richard Scheffenegger <rscheff@freebsd.org> ---
To add more confusion:=20

The advisory UTO option could be used by ipfw to piggy-back on some ACKs, to
indicate to the end hosts, within which interval it expects the end hosts to
send out another keepalive or data/control packet.

https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5482

(Obviously, FBSD would need to implement processing of this options too.
Also, it doesn't help the puristic case, where no modification of the on-wi=
re
packet stream is allowable).

Pragmatically, the most easy way out would be for ipfw to keep additional s=
tate
with the TSopt val and ecr of the most recent packet, and include the TSopt=
 in
ipfw-originated keepalives.

--=20
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
You are on the CC list for the bug.=



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?bug-253476-8303-WcJVZIYWbb>