lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Aug]   [22]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH 1/1] tcp: Wrong timeout for SYN segments
From
Date
On Wed, 2012-08-22 at 10:48 +0200, Alex Bergmann wrote:
> On 08/22/2012 10:06 AM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> >> Prior to 9ad7c049 the timeout was defined with 189secs. Now we have only
> >> a timeout of 63secs.
> >>
> >> ((2 << 5) - 1) * 3 secs = 189 secs
> >> ((2 << 5) - 1) * 1 secs = 63 secs
> >
> > Strange maths ... here I have :
> >
> > (1+2+4+8+16) * 3 = 93 secs
> > vs
> > (1+2+4+8+16) * 1 = 31 secs
> >
> > So even before said commit, we were not rfc1122 compliant.
> >
> > Using 7 retries would give 127 seconds, still not rfc compliant.
>
> You're missing the timeout after the 5th SYN packet was sent. This
> would result in another 32 seconds (96 seconds).
>
> The timeout is calculated here:
>
> net/ipv4/tcp_timer.c(146:150)
>
> if (boundary <= linear_backoff_thresh)
> timeout = ((2 << boundary) - 1) * rto_base;
> else
> timeout = ((2 << linear_backoff_thresh) - 1) * rto_base +
> (boundary - linear_backoff_thresh) * TCP_RTO_MAX;

Thats the code yes but you miss the fact that last occurence of the
timer doesnt send a frame on the _network_

R2 is derived from the last frame sent.

Fact that the connect() is a bit long to return to user space is not
relevant. We could block the task for 2 hours and still be non RFC
compliant.

Actual 5 frames are sent, so the effective global timeout is the one I
quoted.

1 + 2 + 4 + 8 + 16 and its 31

Just do a tcpdump and you can see it.





\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2012-08-22 13:41    [W:0.078 / U:0.356 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site