Skip to content

GitLab

Switch branch/tag
  1. 22 Jul, 2008 1 commit
  3. 19 Jul, 2008 1 commit
  5. 19 Jun, 2008 1 commit
    • Vlad Yasevich's avatar
      sctp: Follow security requirement of responding with 1 packet · 2e3216cd
      Vlad Yasevich authored 
      

RFC 4960, Section 11.4. Protection of Non-SCTP-Capable Hosts

When an SCTP stack receives a packet containing multiple control or
DATA chunks and the processing of the packet requires the sending of
multiple chunks in response, the sender of the response chunk(s) MUST
NOT send more than one packet.  If bundling is supported, multiple
response chunks that fit into a single packet MAY be bundled together
into one single response packet.  If bundling is not supported, then
the sender MUST NOT send more than one response chunk and MUST
discard all other responses.  Note that this rule does NOT apply to a
SACK chunk, since a SACK chunk is, in itself, a response to DATA and
a SACK does not require a response of more DATA.

We implement this by not servicing our outqueue until we reach the end
of the packet.  This enables maximum bundling.  We also identify
'response' chunks and make sure that we only send 1 packet when sending
such chunks.
Signed-off-by: default avatarVlad Yasevich <vladislav.yasevich@hp.com>
Signed-off-by: default avatarDavid S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
      2e3216cd
  7. 04 Jun, 2008 4 commits
  9. 09 May, 2008 1 commit
  11. 24 Mar, 2008 1 commit
  13. 29 Feb, 2008 1 commit
  15. 05 Feb, 2008 1 commit
  17. 28 Jan, 2008 5 commits
  19. 20 Dec, 2007 1 commit
  21. 07 Dec, 2007 1 commit
  23. 09 Nov, 2007 1 commit
  25. 07 Nov, 2007 4 commits
  27. 11 Oct, 2007 1 commit
  29. 10 Oct, 2007 6 commits
  31. 26 Sep, 2007 2 commits
  33. 16 Sep, 2007 2 commits
  35. 30 Aug, 2007 1 commit
    • Wei Yongjun's avatar
      SCTP: Fix to encode PROTOCOL VIOLATION error cause correctly · 00f1c2df
      Wei Yongjun authored 
      

PROTOCOL VIOLATION error cause in ABORT is bad encode when make abort
chunk. When SCTP encode ABORT chunk with PROTOCOL VIOLATION error cause,
it just add the error messages to PROTOCOL VIOLATION error cause, the
rest four bytes(struct sctp_paramhdr) is just add to the chunk, not
change the length of error cause. This cause the ABORT chunk to be a bad
format. The chunk is like this:

ABORT chunk
  Chunk type: ABORT (6)
  Chunk flags: 0x00
  Chunk length: 72 (*1)
  Protocol violation cause
    Cause code: Protocol violation (0x000d)
    Cause length: 62 (*2)
    Cause information: 5468652063756D756C61746976652074736E2061636B2062...
    Cause padding: 0000
[Needless] 00030010
Chunk Length(*1) = 72 but Cause length(*2) only 62, not include the
extend 4 bytes.
((72 - sizeof(chunk_hdr)) = 68) != (62 +3) / 4 * 4
Signed-off-by: default avatarWei Yongjun <yjwei@cn.fujitsu.com>
Signed-off-by: default avatarVlad Yasevich <vladislav.yasevich@hp.com>
      00f1c2df
  37. 13 Jun, 2007 2 commits
  39. 04 May, 2007 1 commit
    • Vlad Yasevich's avatar
      [SCTP]: Set assoc_id correctly during INIT collision. · 07d93967
      Vlad Yasevich authored 
      

During the INIT/COOKIE-ACK collision cases, it's possible to get
into a situation where the association id is not yet set at the time
of the user event generation.  As a result, user events have an
association id set to 0 which will confuse applications.

This happens if we hit case B of duplicate cookie processing.
In the particular example found and provided by Oscar Isaula
<Oscar.Isaula@motorola.com>, flow looks like this:
A				B
---- INIT------->  (lost)
	    <---------INIT------
---- INIT-ACK--->
	    <------ Cookie ECHO

When the Cookie Echo is received, we end up trying to update the
association that was created on A as a result of the (lost) INIT,
but that association doesn't have the ID set yet.
Signed-off-by: default avatarVlad Yasevich <vladislav.yasevich@hp.com>
Signed-off-by: default avatarDavid S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
      07d93967
  41. 26 Apr, 2007 2 commits

Imprint & Privacy Policy