Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by oss.sgi.com (8.11.2/8.11.3) id f71H0Gc08003 for netdev-outgoing; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 10:00:16 -0700 Received: from ms2.inr.ac.ru (minus.inr.ac.ru [193.233.7.97]) by oss.sgi.com (8.11.2/8.11.3) with SMTP id f71H0DV08000 for ; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 10:00:14 -0700 Received: (from kuznet@localhost) by ms2.inr.ac.ru (8.6.13/ANK) id UAA12166; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 20:59:59 +0400 From: kuznet@ms2.inr.ac.ru Message-Id: <200108011659.UAA12166@ms2.inr.ac.ru> Subject: Re: Fw: oops/bug in tcp, SACK doesn't work? To: laforge@gnumonks.org (Harald Welte) Date: Wed, 1 Aug 2001 20:59:59 +0400 (MSK DST) Cc: netdev@oss.sgi.com In-Reply-To: <20010731033801.M1486@obroa-skai.gnumonks.org> from "Harald Welte" at Jul 31, 1 03:38:01 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: owner-netdev@oss.sgi.com Precedence: bulk Hello! > The issue is, that we only keep track of the last time a tcp sequence number > was rewritten. Yes, that means that current netfilter NAT code does not > cope correctly with all cases where you have more than one packet size > alteration per window. Wow! But it is fatal bug. Just do not allow to change it more then once (not for window, you have no reliable way to estimate it, probably for 64K< So I'm not sure if enabling selective acknowledgements could make the > situation worse than it is (given this precondition). At least after > giving it some though, I cannot see how. The situation is opposite, actually. If you mangle seq/ack wrongly, it is fatal. But if you make a mistake in sack, nothing happens, sacks are soft. Alexey