Folks,
Dave Borman and me are trying to get this flaw fixed in the TCP spec --
this is of particular interest since the IETF finally agreed to revise
the old spec. The working copy of our document is:
<https://www.si6networks.com/publications/drafts/draft-gont-tcpm-tcp-seq-validation-04.txt>
I'm wondering if any Linux TCP expert could help with this:
* Would you mind taking a look at our doc, and check if our description
of the Linux behavior is correct?
* If you do something different or better, we'd also like to know.
Thanks!
Cheers,
Fernando
-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject: New Version Notification for
draft-gont-tcpm-tcp-seq-validation-03.txt
Date: Mon, 05 Mar 2018 15:43:15 -0800
From: internet-drafts@ietf.org
To: Fernando Gont <redacted>, David Borman
[off-list ref]
A new version of I-D, draft-gont-tcpm-tcp-seq-validation-03.txt
has been successfully submitted by Fernando Gont and posted to the
IETF repository.
Name: draft-gont-tcpm-tcp-seq-validation
Revision: 03
Title: On the Validation of TCP Sequence Numbers
Document date: 2018-03-05
Group: Individual Submission
Pages: 16
URL:
https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-gont-tcpm-tcp-seq-validation-03.txt
Status:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-gont-tcpm-tcp-seq-validation/
Htmlized:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-gont-tcpm-tcp-seq-validation-03
Htmlized:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-gont-tcpm-tcp-seq-validation-03
Diff:
https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-gont-tcpm-tcp-seq-validation-03
Abstract:
When TCP receives packets that lie outside of the receive window, the
corresponding packets are dropped and either an ACK, RST or no
response is generated due to the out-of-window packet, with no
further processing of the packet. Most of the time, this works just
fine and TCP remains stable, especially when a TCP connection has
unidirectional data flow. However, there are three scenarios in
which packets that are outside of the receive window should still
have their ACK field processed, or else a packet war will take place.
The aforementioned issues have affected a number of popular TCP
implementations, typically leading to connection failures, system
crashes, or other undesirable behaviors. This document describes the
three scenarios in which the aforementioned issues might arise, and
formally updates RFC 793 such that these potential problems are
mitigated.
Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission
until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.
The IETF Secretariat
On Tue, 2018-03-06 at 04:21 -0300, Fernando Gont wrote:
Folks,
Dave Borman and me are trying to get this flaw fixed in the TCP spec
--
this is of particular interest since the IETF finally agreed to
revise
the old spec. The working copy of our document is:
<https://www.si6networks.com/publications/drafts/draft-gont-tcpm-tcp-
seq-validation-04.txt>
I'm wondering if any Linux TCP expert could help with this:
* Would you mind taking a look at our doc, and check if our
description
of the Linux behavior is correct?
Hi Fernando
I have opened Google Bug # 74230088 and copied your request.
We will take a look at this and will come back to you.
Thanks !
* If you do something different or better, we'd also like to know.
Thanks!
Cheers,
Fernando
-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject: New Version Notification for
draft-gont-tcpm-tcp-seq-validation-03.txt
Date: Mon, 05 Mar 2018 15:43:15 -0800
From: internet-drafts@ietf.org
To: Fernando Gont <redacted>, David Borman
[off-list ref]
A new version of I-D, draft-gont-tcpm-tcp-seq-validation-03.txt
has been successfully submitted by Fernando Gont and posted to the
IETF repository.
Name: draft-gont-tcpm-tcp-seq-validation
Revision: 03
Title: On the Validation of TCP Sequence Numbers
Document date: 2018-03-05
Group: Individual Submission
Pages: 16
URL:
https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-gont-tcpm-tcp-seq-validati
on-03.txt
Status:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-gont-tcpm-tcp-seq-validation/
Htmlized:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-gont-tcpm-tcp-seq-validation-03
Htmlized:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-gont-tcpm-tcp-seq-validat
ion-03
Diff:
https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-gont-tcpm-tcp-seq-validation-
03
Abstract:
When TCP receives packets that lie outside of the receive window,
the
corresponding packets are dropped and either an ACK, RST or no
response is generated due to the out-of-window packet, with no
further processing of the packet. Most of the time, this works
just
fine and TCP remains stable, especially when a TCP connection has
unidirectional data flow. However, there are three scenarios in
which packets that are outside of the receive window should still
have their ACK field processed, or else a packet war will take
place.
The aforementioned issues have affected a number of popular TCP
implementations, typically leading to connection failures, system
crashes, or other undesirable behaviors. This document describes
the
three scenarios in which the aforementioned issues might arise,
and
formally updates RFC 793 such that these potential problems are
mitigated.
Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of
submission
until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.
The IETF Secretariat
On 03/06/2018 01:37 PM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
On Tue, 2018-03-06 at 04:21 -0300, Fernando Gont wrote:
quoted
Folks,
Dave Borman and me are trying to get this flaw fixed in the TCP spec
--
this is of particular interest since the IETF finally agreed to
revise
the old spec. The working copy of our document is:
<https://www.si6networks.com/publications/drafts/draft-gont-tcpm-tcp-
seq-validation-04.txt>
I'm wondering if any Linux TCP expert could help with this:
* Would you mind taking a look at our doc, and check if our
description
of the Linux behavior is correct?
Hi Fernando
I have opened Google Bug # 74230088 and copied your request.
We will take a look at this and will come back to you.
Thank you so much!
Cheers,
--
Fernando Gont
SI6 Networks
e-mail: fgont@si6networks.com
PGP Fingerprint: 6666 31C6 D484 63B2 8FB1 E3C4 AE25 0D55 1D4E 7492