Re: [Dime] Message mis-sequencing over SCTP

Sebastien Decugis <sdecugis@nict.go.jp> Thu, 01 April 2010 01:45 UTC

Return-Path: <sdecugis@nict.go.jp>
X-Original-To: dime@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dime@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 97B303A6916 for <dime@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 31 Mar 2010 18:45:47 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.225
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.225 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, DNS_FROM_OPENWHOIS=1.13, HELO_EQ_JP=1.244]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id jv+0oVx3siOk for <dime@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 31 Mar 2010 18:45:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ns2.nict.go.jp (ns2.nict.go.jp [IPv6:2001:2f8:29::3]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B1E013A68E3 for <dime@ietf.org>; Wed, 31 Mar 2010 18:45:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from gw2.nict.go.jp (gw2 [133.243.18.251]) by ns2.nict.go.jp with ESMTP id o311kEt3023980 for <dime@ietf.org>; Thu, 1 Apr 2010 10:46:14 +0900 (JST)
Received: from gw2.nict.go.jp (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by gw2.nict.go.jp with ESMTP id o311kEbC014867 for <dime@ietf.org>; Thu, 1 Apr 2010 10:46:14 +0900 (JST)
Received: from mail3.nict.go.jp (mail.nict.go.jp [133.243.18.3]) by gw2.nict.go.jp with ESMTP id o311kECd014864 for <dime@ietf.org>; Thu, 1 Apr 2010 10:46:14 +0900 (JST)
Received: from mail3.nict.go.jp (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail3.nict.go.jp (NICT Mail) with ESMTP id 121FD5243 for <dime@ietf.org>; Thu, 1 Apr 2010 10:46:14 +0900 (JST)
Received: from [133.243.146.171] (5gou2f-dhcp11.nict.go.jp [133.243.146.171]) by mail3.nict.go.jp (NICT Mail) with ESMTP id 0A743195F for <dime@ietf.org>; Thu, 1 Apr 2010 10:46:14 +0900 (JST)
Message-ID: <4BB3FAE1.4050503@nict.go.jp>
Date: Thu, 01 Apr 2010 10:46:09 +0900
From: Sebastien Decugis <sdecugis@nict.go.jp>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.0; fr; rv:1.9.1.8) Gecko/20100227 Thunderbird/3.0.3
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: dime@ietf.org
References: <s2yce72e8461003310636z294f083of823a022c19bf29d@mail.gmail.com> <BLU0-SMTP10B5C02EA204511F92B61AD81E0@phx.gbl>
In-Reply-To: <BLU0-SMTP10B5C02EA204511F92B61AD81E0@phx.gbl>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.0.1
OpenPGP: id=33D9F61D
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Subject: Re: [Dime] Message mis-sequencing over SCTP
X-BeenThere: dime@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Diameter Maintanence and Extentions Working Group <dime.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dime>, <mailto:dime-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dime>
List-Post: <mailto:dime@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dime-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dime>, <mailto:dime-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 01 Apr 2010 01:45:47 -0000

Hi,

Here is my implementer point of view on this issue:
 - this issue *does* occur, I saw several messages dropped because of
this in my tests. This is problematic because since the connection is
not dropped, there is no reason for the sender to re-issue the message.
 - I fixed the problem by forcing all messages on the responder side to
be sent on the same stream as the CEA, until a new message is received
from the initiator (so that we are sure the connection is in open state).

I am not sure if this is worth mentioning in the document, or if it is
considered as an implementation-specific solution. If there is an
agreement to add a small paragraph about it in 3588bis, I can volunteer
to write a text describing the issue and a solution...

Best regards,
Sebastien.

Le 31/03/2010 22:51, Tom Taylor a écrit :
> Sounds like a good point. Seems to me the rules should be:
>
>  - use only stream 0 until the Diameter connection has been set up
>  - all messages relating to the same session must use the same stream.
>
> That should be added to section 2.1.1.
>
>
> Naveen Kottapalli wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Am just wondering whether the mis-sequencing in the delivery of
>> packets when
>> SCTP is being used as transport layer would cause any problem.  For
>> example,
>> take an association with 5 out-streams to send out the Diameter
>> messages.
>> Immediately after sending CEA on stream 0, all other messages are
>> sent over
>> other streams like 1, 2, 3, and 4.
>>
>> There is a chance that the other Diameter messages will reach the peer
>> before the CEA is processed?   Does the existing draft miss the
>> sequencing
>> problem over SCTP?
>>
>> Yours,
>> Naveen.
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> DiME mailing list
>> DiME@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dime
> _______________________________________________
> DiME mailing list
> DiME@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dime
>

-- 
Sebastien Decugis
Research fellow
Network Architecture Group
NICT (nict.go.jp)