Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 26 Jan 2015 09:46:26 -0200 | From | Marcelo Ricardo Leitner <> | Subject | Re: Question on SCTP ABORT chunk is generated when the association_max_retrans is reached |
| |
Hi,
On 25-01-2015 23:27, Sun Paul wrote: > Hi > > sorry for the late reply. I am a bit confused. when side-A sends a > request to side-B, and side-B return the response, but side-A keep > re-transmit the same request to side-B, why side-B needed to send a > ABORT to side-A?
That happens on data transfers. When A pushes data to B, A has to retry it until B finally acknowledges it and A receive this signal. If the ack from B gets dropped, A has no way to know if a) the ack was lost or b) its initial message never actually made it to A, thus it retransmits. If it reaches a limit, it gives up..
> If it is used in order to reestablish the connection, shoudn't it > should be side-A to send ABORT instead?
Meant to reestablish it? Not really.. just to keep both sides in sync, as A has given up by then.
Marcelo
> - PS > > On Sat, Jan 24, 2015 at 3:05 AM, Daniel Borkmann <dborkman@redhat.com> wrote: >> On 01/23/2015 07:36 PM, Michael Tuexen wrote: >> ... >>> >>> Yepp. It might not reach the peer or it might. If it does it helps >>> to keep the states in sync. If it doesn't it sometimes helps in >>> analysing tracefiles. In BSD, we also send it. It is not required, >>> doesn't harm and is useful in some cases... >> >> >> Ok, as the TCB is destroyed in any case, should be fine then. >> >> Thanks, >> Daniel > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html >
| |