在 2020/11/9 下午10:01, Eric Dumazet 写道:
On Mon, Nov 9, 2020 at 12:41 PM Eric Dumazet wrote:
Packetdrill test would be :
// Force syncookies
`sysctl -q net.ipv4.tcp_syncookies=2`
0 socket(..., SOCK_STREAM, IPPROTO_TCP) = 3
+0 setsockopt(3, SOL_SOCKET, SO_REUSEADDR, [1], 4) = 0
+
在 2020/11/9 下午6:12, Mao Wenan 写道:
在 2020/11/9 下午5:56, Eric Dumazet 写道:
On Mon, Nov 9, 2020 at 10:33 AM Mao Wenan
wrote:
When net.ipv4.tcp_syncookies=1 and syn flood is happened,
cookie_v4_check or cookie_v6_check tries to redo what
tcp_v4_send_synack or tcp_v6_send_synack did,
rsk_window
在 2020/11/9 下午5:56, Eric Dumazet 写道:
On Mon, Nov 9, 2020 at 10:33 AM Mao Wenan wrote:
When net.ipv4.tcp_syncookies=1 and syn flood is happened,
cookie_v4_check or cookie_v6_check tries to redo what
tcp_v4_send_synack or tcp_v6_send_synack did,
rsk_window_clamp will be changed if SOCK_RCVBUF
When net.ipv4.tcp_syncookies=1 and syn flood is happened,
cookie_v4_check or cookie_v6_check tries to redo what
tcp_v4_send_synack or tcp_v6_send_synack did,
rsk_window_clamp will be changed if SOCK_RCVBUF is set,
which will make rcv_wscale is different, the client
still operates with initial windo
