From owner-freebsd-net@freebsd.org Fri Mar 17 10:06:13 2017 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-net@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 49707D1067D for ; Fri, 17 Mar 2017 10:06:13 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org (kenobi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::16:76]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 390E41733 for ; Fri, 17 Mar 2017 10:06:13 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from bugs.freebsd.org ([127.0.1.118]) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id v2HA6CWf042247 for ; Fri, 17 Mar 2017 10:06:13 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: freebsd-net@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 217637] One TCP connection accepted TWO times Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2017 10:06:13 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: AssignedTo X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: Base System X-Bugzilla-Component: kern X-Bugzilla-Version: CURRENT X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: Affects Only Me X-Bugzilla-Who: slw@zxy.spb.ru X-Bugzilla-Status: In Progress X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: --- X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: freebsd-net@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: cc Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2017 10:06:13 -0000 https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D217637 slw@zxy.spb.ru changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |slw@zxy.spb.ru --- Comment #24 from slw@zxy.spb.ru --- (In reply to Michael Tuexen from comment #12) > When the server gets this TCP ACK segment, it finds a listening socket an= d verifies that the segment is a valid SYN-cookie. can you explain some more? why SYN-cookie is valid for this ACK? I mean only first ACK to SYN-ACK can valid, other ACK use different SEQ and must be invalid. --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.=