Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2005 13:30:57 -0800 (PST) From: Mohan Srinivasan <mohan_srinivasan@yahoo.com> To: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org>, Sam Jansen <sam@meta.net.nz> Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: SACK problems Message-ID: <20050210213057.96467.qmail@web80606.mail.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <20050210212852.GA10195@xor.obsecurity.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
No. That fix is not relevant. I'll take a look at this in a bit (after I fix the other SACK issue reported a couple of days ago). mohan --- Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> wrote: > 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 > > interesting behaviour from a FreeBSD 5.3 host using TCP SACK. > > > > I've detailed this problem fully at: > > > > http://www.wand.net.nz/~stj2/nsc/emu_freebsd.html > > > > PCAP traces and some screenshots from tcptrace graphs can be found at > > the above link to show what is happening. It looks to me like SACK > > blocks are being incorrectly generated in this example. I can't think of > > any valid reason why a SACK block would SACK from below the current ACK > > value to above it (which is the problem here). > > > > Thoughts, anyone? Am I just wrong here and this is valid, expected > > behaviour? > > A fix to the SACK code was committed yesterday, which may or may not > be relevant. > > Kris > > ATTACHMENT part 2 application/pgp-signature
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20050210213057.96467.qmail>