lkml.org 
[lkml]   [1998]   [May]   [1]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
Subject[2.1.99] TCPv4 bad checksum

I know we all (or many of us) have been seeing:

TCPv4 bad checksum from 152.204.52.232:0a2b to 207.174.18.194:0050,len=20/20/40
TCPv4 bad checksum from 32.100.112.113:0ea5 to 207.174.18.194:0019,len=35/35/55
TCPv4 bad checksum from 32.100.112.113:0ea5 to 207.174.18.194:0019,len=20/20/40
TCPv4 bad checksum from 32.100.112.113:0ea5 to 207.174.18.194:0019,len=35/35/55
TCPv4 bad checksum from 32.100.112.113:0ea5 to 207.174.18.194:0019,len=20/20/40
TCPv4 bad checksum from 32.100.112.113:0ea5 to 207.174.18.194:0019,len=50/50/70
TCPv4 bad checksum from 32.100.112.113:0ea5 to 207.174.18.194:0019,len=32/32/52
TCPv4 bad checksum from 32.100.112.113:0ea5 to 207.174.18.194:0019,len=556/556/576
TCPv4 bad checksum from 32.100.112.113:0ea5 to 207.174.18.194:0019,len=119/119/139

Type messages.

Davem maintains (I am pretty sure correctly) that these are caused by
VJ header compression bugs in various other ppp implementations.

Is there anything we can do to confirm this?
Is it significant that they are always of the form:

XX/XX/XX+20

ie, are they all failing in the same way so the kernel could detect
this and work around it? Is the checksum always off by 20?

Anyhow, these messages cause no harm that I can tell but it would be
nice to resolve them before 2.2...If nothing else, we should remove
them if they no longer tell us meaningfull info...

kevin

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:42    [W:0.041 / U:0.060 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site