| Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Age | Files | Lines |
|---|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Currently we set ACK on flags packets only when the acknowledged byte
pointer has advanced, or we hadn't previously set a window. This means
in particular that we can send a window update with no ACK flag, which
doesn't appear to be correct. RFC 9293 requires a receiver to ignore such
a packet [0], and indeed it appears that every non-SYN, non-RST packet
should have the ACK flag.
The reason for the existing logic, rather than always forcing an ACK seems
to be to avoid having the packet mistaken as a duplicate ACK which might
trigger a fast retransmit. However, earlier tests in the function mean we
won't reach here if we don't have either an advance in the ack pointer -
which will already set the ACK flag, or a window update - which shouldn't
trigger a fast retransmit.
[0] https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc9293.html#section-3.10.7.4-2.5.2.1
Link: https://github.com/containers/podman/issues/22146
Link: https://bugs.passt.top/show_bug.cgi?id=84
Signed-off-by: David Gibson <david@gibson.dropbear.id.au>
Signed-off-by: Stefano Brivio <sbrivio@redhat.com>
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
tcp_send_flag() will sometimes force on the ACK flag for all !SYN packets.
This doesn't make sense for RST packets, where plain RST and RST+ACK have
somewhat different meanings. AIUI, RST+ACK indicates an abrupt end to
a connection, but acknowledges data already sent. Plain RST indicates an
abort, when one end receives a packet that doesn't seem to make sense in
the context of what it knows about the connection. All of the cases where
we send RSTs are the second, so we don't want an ACK flag, but we currently
could add one anyway.
Change that, so we won't add an ACK to an RST unless the caller explicitly
requests it.
Signed-off-by: David Gibson <david@gibson.dropbear.id.au>
Signed-off-by: Stefano Brivio <sbrivio@redhat.com>
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
We have different paths for controlling the ACK flag for the SYN and !SYN
paths. This amounts to sometimes forcing on the ACK flag in the !SYN path
regardless of options. We can rearrange things to explicitly be that which
will make things neater for some future changes.
Signed-off-by: David Gibson <david@gibson.dropbear.id.au>
Signed-off-by: Stefano Brivio <sbrivio@redhat.com>
|
|
|
The DUP_ACK flag to tcp_send_flag() has two effects: first it forces the
setting of the ACK flag in the packet, even if we otherwise wouldn't.
Secondly, it causes a duplicate of the flags packet to be sent immediately
after the first.
Setting the ACK flag to tcp_send_flag() also has the first effect, so
instead of having DUP_ACK also do that, pass both flags when we need both
operations. This slightly simplifies the logic of tcp_send_flag() in a way
that makes some future changes easier.
Signed-off-by: David Gibson <david@gibson.dropbear.id.au>
Signed-off-by: Stefano Brivio <sbrivio@redhat.com>
|
