Re: [tcpm] TCP SEQ validation (Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-gont-tcpm-tcp-seq-validation-02.txt)

Hi Richard,

On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 at 4:41 AM, Scheffenegger, Richard <rs@netapp.com>
wrote:

>  I would think PS is the proper way – there is no experimenting with a
> buggy spec, and Fernando pointed out, that most stacks had fixed that
> particular bug in 793 for quite some while, right?
>

Yes.  I believe no one would argue the bug in 793 pointed out in the draft.
Also, I believe the solution presented in the draft is "make sense".
What I am wondering is this make sense solution can be the "once for all"
solution and we can happily update 793.
I guess some implementations have been using a bit different approach than
this, which gives me some concerns to update 793.
It will be very useful info if some implementations use this approach or
have a plan to use this approach.

Thanks,
--
Yoshi

>
> *From:* tcpm [mailto:tcpm-bounces@ietf.org] *On Behalf Of *Yoshifumi
> Nishida
> *Sent:* Donnerstag, 26. März 2015 18:23
> *To:* Fernando Gont
> *Cc:* tcpm@ietf.org
> *Subject:* Re: [tcpm] TCP SEQ validation (Fwd: New Version Notification
> for draft-gont-tcpm-tcp-seq-validation-02.txt)
>
>
>
> Hi,
>
> I would like to check people who are willing to support it also agree that
> this draft is published as a PS and it updates 793, or prefer other ways.
>
> --
>
> Yoshi
>
>
>
> On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 12:03 PM, Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com>
> wrote:
>
> Folks,
>
> Thanks to some folks' push over time, and the fact that both co-authors
> happened to find themselves at IETF 92, we've reposted our latests
> version of this I-D (since the previous one had expired), in the hopes
> of making progress.
>
> Any comments on this rev will be appreciated. Additionally, I'll
> repost/fwd Karen's latest comments on this I-D, which will be the basis
> for the changes in the next rev.
>
> Thanks!
>
> Best regards,
> Fernando
>
>
>
>
> -------- Forwarded Message --------
> Subject: New Version Notification for
> draft-gont-tcpm-tcp-seq-validation-02.txt
> Date: Thu, 26 Mar 2015 11:55:46 -0700
> From: internet-drafts@ietf.org
> To: Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com>, David Borman
> <david.borman@quantum.com>, Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com>, David
> Borman <david.borman@quantum.com>
>
>
> A new version of I-D, draft-gont-tcpm-tcp-seq-validation-02.txt
> has been successfully submitted by Fernando Gont and posted to the
> IETF repository.
>
> Name:           draft-gont-tcpm-tcp-seq-validation
> Revision:       02
> Title:          On the Validation of TCP Sequence Numbers
> Document date:  2015-03-26
> Group:          Individual Submission
> Pages:          16
> URL:
>
> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-gont-tcpm-tcp-seq-validation-02.txt
> Status:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-gont-tcpm-tcp-seq-validation/
> Htmlized:
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-gont-tcpm-tcp-seq-validation-02
> Diff:
> http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-gont-tcpm-tcp-seq-validation-02
>
> 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
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> tcpm mailing list
> tcpm@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpm
>
>
>