Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 10 Feb 2005 13:28:52 -0800
From:      Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org>
To:        Sam Jansen <sam@meta.net.nz>
Cc:        freebsd-net@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: SACK problems
Message-ID:  <20050210212852.GA10195@xor.obsecurity.org>
In-Reply-To: <420BCEF7.1080603@meta.net.nz>
References:  <420BCEF7.1080603@meta.net.nz>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

--UlVJffcvxoiEqYs2
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Fri, Feb 11, 2005 at 10:15:35AM +1300, Sam Jansen wrote:
> During some testing on an isolated network we have, I found some=20
> interesting behaviour from a FreeBSD 5.3 host using TCP SACK.
>=20
> I've detailed this problem fully at:
>=20
>    http://www.wand.net.nz/~stj2/nsc/emu_freebsd.html
>=20
> PCAP traces and some screenshots from tcptrace graphs can be found at=20
> the above link to show what is happening. It looks to me like SACK=20
> blocks are being incorrectly generated in this example. I can't think of=
=20
> any valid reason why a SACK block would SACK from below the current ACK=
=20
> value to above it (which is the problem here).
>=20
> Thoughts, anyone? Am I just wrong here and this is valid, expected=20
> behaviour?

A fix to the SACK code was committed yesterday, which may or may not
be relevant.

Kris

--UlVJffcvxoiEqYs2
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (FreeBSD)

iD8DBQFCC9IUWry0BWjoQKURAnpyAJ9Z8R6ydGjhdKCqpt+zPuCC/0K9qACePnEX
D/fZFvFAiL1m8Af2l+pMJjg=
=kW8D
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--UlVJffcvxoiEqYs2--



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20050210212852.GA10195>