On 12/03/2013 08:11 AM, Sun Paul wrote: > But how about the HB and HB_ACK? Still valid? As long as the source address is part of the association, then yes it is perfectly valid. -vlad > On Dec 3, 2013 8:32 PM, "Vlad Yasevich" <vyasevich@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> On 12/02/2013 09:19 PM, Sun Paul wrote: >>> so in this case, says >>> >>> (NODE-A) IP-B send INIT to IP-X (NODE-B), and then IP-Y (NODE-B) >>> returns INIT_ACK to IP-B (NODE-A) >>> >>> this is also treated as a valid, am I correct? >> >> As long as IP-X (Node-B) is present in the address list of the INIT-ACK >> chunk, yes. >> >> There is the code in __sctp_rcv_lookup_harder() that looks for other >> adddresses in the INIT and INIT-ACK chunks. >> >> -vlad >>> >>> >>> On Tue, Dec 3, 2013 at 10:03 AM, Vlad Yasevich <vyasevich@xxxxxxxxx> >> wrote: >>>> On 12/02/2013 08:39 PM, Sun Paul wrote: >>>>> Another question >>>>> >>>>> if a wrong source IP is used, does the association still classified as >> normal? >>>> >>>> What do you mean my wrong source IP? As long as the address is part of >>>> the association, it can be used. >>>> >>>> -vlad >>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Tue, Dec 3, 2013 at 9:31 AM, Sun Paul <paulrbk@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>>>> Thanks Vlad >>>>>> >>>>>> I checked on the route, and it looks correct. >>>>>> >>>>>> [root@localhost ~]# ip route get 11.1.1.1 from 110.1.1.1 >>>>>> 11.1.1.1 from 110.1.1.1 via 110.1.1.254 dev eth1 >>>>>> cache mtu 1500 advmss 1460 hoplimit 64 >>>>>> >>>>>> [root@localhost ~]# ip route get 11.1.1.1 from 120.1.1.1 >>>>>> 11.1.1.1 from 120.1.1.1 via 120.1.1.254 dev eth2 >>>>>> cache mtu 1500 advmss 1460 hoplimit 64 >>>>>> >>>>>> [root@localhost ~]# ip route get 12.1.1.1 from 120.1.1.1 >>>>>> 12.1.1.1 from 120.1.1.1 via 120.1.1.254 dev eth2 >>>>>> cache mtu 1500 advmss 1460 hoplimit 64 >>>>>> >>>>>> [root@localhost ~]# ip route get 12.1.1.1 from 110.1.1.1 >>>>>> 12.1.1.1 from 110.1.1.1 via 110.1.1.254 dev eth1 >>>>>> cache mtu 1500 advmss 1460 hoplimit 64 >>>>>> >>>>>> so, if this is not being handled in LKSCTP, is it possible to suggest >>>>>> a way how we can achieve it? >>>>>> >>>>>> On Tue, Dec 3, 2013 at 12:42 AM, Vlad Yasevich <vyasevich@xxxxxxxxx> >> wrote: >>>>>>> On 12/02/2013 10:45 AM, Karl Heiss wrote: >>>>>>>> On Mon, Dec 2, 2013 at 9:38 AM, Vlad Yasevich <vyasevich@xxxxxxxxx> >> wrote: >>>>>>>>> On 11/27/2013 11:03 PM, Sun Paul wrote: >>>>>>>>>> How LKSCTP select which source address to use for the INIT_ACK or >>>>>>>>>> HB_ACK? below is the testing result where a router is located in >> the >>>>>>>>>> middle. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Before starting the application. the packet on eth1 and eth2 are >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> eth1 >>>>>>>>>> 0 packets dropped by kernel >>>>>>>>>> [root@localhost ~]# tcpdump -i eth1 -s 0 -nn >>>>>>>>>> tcpdump: verbose output suppressed, use -v or -vv for full >> protocol decode >>>>>>>>>> listening on eth1, link-type EN10MB (Ethernet), capture size >> 65535 bytes >>>>>>>>>> 11:24:14.262489 IP 12.1.1.1.2905 > 110.1.1.1.2905: sctp (1) [INIT] >>>>>>>>>> [init tag: 28362903] [rwnd: 102400] [OS: 16] [MIS: 16] [init TSN: >> 0] >>>>>>>>>> 11:24:14.262522 IP 110.1.1.1.2905 > 12.1.1.1.2905: sctp (1) >> [ABORT] >>>>>>>>>> 11:24:14.539486 >>>>>>>>>> 11:24:16.262488 IP 12.1.1.1.2905 > 110.1.1.1.2905: sctp (1) [INIT] >>>>>>>>>> [init tag: 29391734] [rwnd: 102400] [OS: 16] [MIS: 16] [init TSN: >> 0] >>>>>>>>>> 11:24:16.262520 IP 110.1.1.1.2905 > 12.1.1.1.2905: sctp (1) >> [ABORT] >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> eth2 >>>>>>>>>> [root@localhost ~]# tcpdump -i eth2 -s 0 -nn >>>>>>>>>> tcpdump: verbose output suppressed, use -v or -vv for full >> protocol decode >>>>>>>>>> listening on eth2, link-type EN10MB (Ethernet), capture size >> 65535 bytes >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> When starting the application. the packet show as below. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> eth1 >>>>>>>>>> 11:26:02.261511 IP 12.1.1.1.2905 > 110.1.1.1.2905: sctp (1) [INIT] >>>>>>>>>> [init tag: 26256828] [rwnd: 102400] [OS: 16] [MIS: 16] [init TSN: >> 0] >>>>>>>>>> 11:26:02.263513 IP 12.1.1.1.2905 > 110.1.1.1.2905: sctp (1) >> [COOKIE ECHO] >>>>>>>>>> 11:26:02.264518 IP 12.1.1.1.2905 > 110.1.1.1.2905: sctp (1) [HB >> REQ] >>>>>>>>>> 11:26:02.563511 IP 12.1.1.1.2905 > 110.1.1.1.2905: sctp (1) [HB >> REQ] >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> eth2 >>>>>>>>>> 11:26:02.261604 IP 120.1.1.1.2905 > 12.1.1.1.2905: sctp (1) [INIT >> ACK] >>>>>>>>>> [init tag: 3478239387] [rwnd: 131072] [OS: 5] [MIS: 5] [init TSN: >>>>>>>>>> 2330749678] >>>>>>>>>> 11:26:02.263583 IP 120.1.1.1.2905 > 12.1.1.1.2905: sctp (1) >> [COOKIE ACK] >>>>>>>>>> 11:26:02.264548 IP 120.1.1.1.2905 > 12.1.1.1.2905: sctp (1) [HB >> ACK] >>>>>>>>>> 11:26:02.264652 IP 11.1.1.1.2905 > 120.1.1.1.2905: sctp (1) [HB >> REQ] >>>>>>>>>> 11:26:02.264705 IP 120.1.1.1.2905 > 11.1.1.1.2905: sctp (1) [HB >> ACK] >>>>>>>>>> 11:26:02.563543 IP 120.1.1.1.2905 > 12.1.1.1.2905: sctp (1) [HB >> ACK] >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> From the above result, you can see that the INIT, COOKIE ECHO and >>>>>>>>>> HB_REQ originated from 12.1.1.1 on eth1, but the ACK (INIT_ACK, >>>>>>>>>> COOKIE_ACK, HB_ACK) are returned on eth2 using source address >>>>>>>>>> 120.1.1.1 instead of 110.1.1.1. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Why LKSCTP use 120.1.1.1 as source instead of 110.1.1.1? >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> For simple ICMP ping test, it is normal, but not for SCTP. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> eth1 >>>>>>>>>> 11:30:02.824548 IP 12.1.1.1 > 110.1.1.1: ICMP echo request, id >> 37178, >>>>>>>>>> seq 12, length 64 >>>>>>>>>> 11:30:02.824559 IP 110.1.1.1 > 12.1.1.1: ICMP echo reply, id >> 37178, >>>>>>>>>> seq 12, length 64 >>>>>>>>>> 11:30:03.825551 IP 12.1.1.1 > 110.1.1.1: ICMP echo request, id >> 37178, >>>>>>>>>> seq 13, length 64 >>>>>>>>>> 11:30:03.825561 IP 110.1.1.1 > 12.1.1.1: ICMP echo reply, id >> 37178, >>>>>>>>>> seq 13, length 64 >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> eth2 >>>>>>>>>> 11:30:34.027687 IP 11.1.1.1 > 120.1.1.1: ICMP echo request, id >> 46138, >>>>>>>>>> seq 2, length 64 >>>>>>>>>> 11:30:34.027697 IP 120.1.1.1 > 11.1.1.1: ICMP echo reply, id >> 46138, >>>>>>>>>> seq 2, length 64 >>>>>>>>>> 11:30:35.027686 IP 11.1.1.1 > 120.1.1.1: ICMP echo request, id >> 46138, >>>>>>>>>> seq 3, length 64 >>>>>>>>>> 11:30:35.027694 IP 120.1.1.1 > 11.1.1.1: ICMP echo reply, id >> 46138, >>>>>>>>>> seq 3, length 64 >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Below is the route information >>>>>>>>>> #route -n >>>>>>>>>> Kernel IP routing table >>>>>>>>>> Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref >> Use Iface >>>>>>>>>> 110.1.1.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 >> 0 eth1 >>>>>>>>>> 120.1.1.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 >> 0 eth2 >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> # ip route show >>>>>>>>>> 110.1.1.0/24 dev eth1 proto kernel scope link src 110.1.1.1 >>>>>>>>>> 120.1.1.0/24 dev eth2 proto kernel scope link src 120.1.1.1 >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Since we are using iproute2, so we will have dedicate routing >> table >>>>>>>>>> per interface >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> # ip route show table SCTP1 >>>>>>>>>> default via 110.1.1.254 dev eth1 >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> # ip route show table SCTP2 >>>>>>>>>> default via 120.1.1.254 dev eth2 >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> # ip rule ls >>>>>>>>>> 0: from all lookup local >>>>>>>>>> 101: from 110.1.1.1 lookup SCTP1 >>>>>>>>>> 102: from 120.1.1.1 lookup SCTP2 >>>>>>>>>> 32766: from all lookup main >>>>>>>>>> 32767: from all lookup default >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> How LKSCTP select source address to reply? If we know how it >> works, >>>>>>>>>> then we may know what is going wrong. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> LKSCTP will prefer the address returned from the routing table as >> long >>>>>>>>> as it is one of the addresses that is bound by the socket and are >> usable >>>>>>>>> by the association. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> If the address returned from the route lookup is not part of the >>>>>>>>> association, then lksctp attempts to lookup routes using one of the >>>>>>>>> source addresses it has available. Usually the first lookup >> succeeds >>>>>>>>> due to the host-model implementation in linux. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> You may want to change your rule set to be destination based. Then >>>>>>>>> in the table associated with the rule, specify the source address >>>>>>>>> you want to be used. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> -vlad >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I have had similar qualms myself about this behavior, and I honestly >>>>>>>> don't know what the correct answer should be... >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> In my opinion, shouldn't the source address "just work" for >>>>>>>> acknowledgements? If the spec explicitly states that the ACK should >>>>>>>> have a source address that matches the destination of the chunk >> being >>>>>>>> ACKed, why should someone have to configure this behavior outside of >>>>>>>> the SCTP stack by default? Is it a technical limitation, or is this >>>>>>>> done for a particular reason? I can understand needing to override >>>>>>>> the behavior, but why isn't the default "sane"? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I think the results are sane, they simply may not match expectations. >>>>>>> SCTP spec doesn't say anything about source address selection. It >>>>>>> says that a response should be send back to the source of the >> request. >>>>>>> This is being done in both cases, i.e. the destination address in >>>>>>> INIT-ACK matches the source of the INIT. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The spec does contain the MAY text that allows finer control of >> source >>>>>>> addresses, but lksctp doesn't seem to implement that. Whenever we've >>>>>>> tried, we couldn't get the generic mechanism working to please >> everyone, >>>>>>> as everyone had slightly different configurations and expectations. >> So >>>>>>> we left it to the rules engine. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> In this setup, it just appears that the default routing is not what >> you >>>>>>> expect. You can easily check this with 'ip route get' command. If >> it >>>>>>> is not what you want linux allows you to change that via ip rules. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -vlad >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Karl >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 8:45 PM, Neil Horman < >> nhorman@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 07:10:49AM +0800, Sun Paul wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Vlad >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Thank for your reply. If it is based on the destination IP to >> find the >>>>>>>>>>>> best route, why the problem didn't happen on single-homing >> sample? >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Because You only ever use one address from NODE A (12.1.1.1) >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> In the single-homing sample that provided in the original >> email, both >>>>>>>>>>>> of the interfaces (eth1 and eth2) are presented on NODE-B >> during the >>>>>>>>>>>> test. However, the LKSCTP library know to use the interface >> eth1 to >>>>>>>>>>>> respond to the SCTP request. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Yes, because it does a route lookup to each of the two ip >> addresses to NODE B, >>>>>>>>>>> and in both lookups, the route indicates that only one source >> address should be >>>>>>>>>>> used (12.1.1.1). If you issue a ip route show command, you'll >> see that routes >>>>>>>>>>> to both address on NODE B match on a rule that specifies the >> same src address >>>>>>>>>>> and interface be used. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Neil >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> - PS >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 7:09 AM, Sun Paul <paulrbk@xxxxxxxxx> >> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Vlad >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Thank for your reply. If it is based on the destination IP to >> find the >>>>>>>>>>>>> best route, why the problem didn't happen on single-homing >> sample? >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> In the single-homing sample that provided in the original >> email, both >>>>>>>>>>>>> of the interfaces (eth1 and eth2) are presented on NODE-B >> during the >>>>>>>>>>>>> test. However, the LKSCTP library know to use the interface >> eth1 to >>>>>>>>>>>>> respond to the SCTP request. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> - PS >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 26, 2013 at 11:19 PM, Vlad Yasevich < >> vyasevich@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 11/25/2013 08:03 PM, Sun Paul wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> we have a problem on using LKSCTP to form a 4 ways >> multi-homing network. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Configuration >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - Node-A has 2 IP addresses in different subnets, known as >> IP-A (eth1), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IP-B (eth2) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - Node-B has 2 IP addresses in different subnets, known as >> IP-X (eth1), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IP-Y (eth2) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> First of all, this is not a 4 way multi-homed network. As >> far as each >>>>>>>>>>>>>> SCTP association is concerned, it has only 2 destinations to >> send to >>>>>>>>>>>>>> so it has only 2 ways to get there. The fact that you have >> multiple >>>>>>>>>>>>>> local addresses doesn't mean that every local address can and >> should >>>>>>>>>>>>>> be used to connect to the remote. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the four way paths are shown below. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1. IP-A (11.1.1.1) to IP-X (11.1.1.11) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2. IP-B (12.1.1.1) to IP-Y (12.1.1.11) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3. IP-A (11.1.1.1) to IP-Y (12.1.1.11) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 4. IP-B (12.1.1.1) to IP-X (11.1.1.11) >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> No, actually you only have 2 paths: one to IPX and one to >> IP-Y. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Which source address you choose is based on routing policy >>>>>>>>>>>>>> decisions and is outside the scope of SCTP. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the HB/HB_ACK is normal for the paths " IP-A to IP-X" and >> "IP-B to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IP-Y", but it is not correct for the rest of two. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Right, because linux is using a host addressing model, not an >> interface >>>>>>>>>>>>>> addressing model. SCTP stack simply finds the best source >> address >>>>>>>>>>>>>> that can be used to reach IP-X and it happens to be IP-A. So >> that >>>>>>>>>>>>>> is what it is going to use. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> The above explains why you are seeing what you describe below. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> In the end, linux SCTP implementation determines paths solely >> based >>>>>>>>>>>>>> on the destination address. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> -vlad >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> First of all, we are using iproute2 to form 2 table such >> that when >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IP-B arrives on IP-X, it will know how to route back to IP-B >> on the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> same interface, i.e (eth1). Same logic for the path "IP-A to >> IP-X". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What we observed here is that when 12.1.1.1 sends INIT to >> 11.1.1.11, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> LKSCTP will send back the INIT_ACK to 12.1.1.1 using >> 12.1.1.11 but not >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> using the IP 11.1.1.11. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The above operation makes the subsequence HB/HB_ACK in using >> wrong IP address. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> TCP trace on eth1 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 18:02:41.058640 IP 12.1.1.1.2905 > 11.1.1.11.2905: sctp (1) >> [INIT] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [init tag: 19933036] [rwnd: 102400] [OS: 16] [MIS: 16] [init >> TSN: 0] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 18:02:41.061634 IP 12.1.1.1.2905 > 11.1.1.11.2905: sctp (1) >> [COOKIE ECHO] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 18:02:41.062642 IP 12.1.1.1.2905 > 11.1.1.11.2905: sctp (1) >> [HB REQ] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 18:02:41.062846 IP 11.1.1.11.2905 > 11.1.1.1.2905: sctp (1) >> [HB ACK] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 18:02:41.361811 IP 11.1.1.11.2905 > 11.1.1.1.2905: sctp (1) >> [HB ACK] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 18:02:41.661791 IP 11.1.1.11.2905 > 11.1.1.1.2905: sctp (1) >> [HB ACK] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 18:02:41.961791 IP 11.1.1.11.2905 > 11.1.1.1.2905: sctp (1) >> [HB ACK] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> TCP trace on eth2 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 18:02:41.058755 IP 12.1.1.11.2905 > 12.1.1.1.2905: sctp (1) >> [INIT ACK] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [init tag: 424726157] [rwnd: 131072] [OS: 5] [MIS: 5] [init >> TSN: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3340756356] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 18:02:41.061696 IP 12.1.1.11.2905 > 12.1.1.1.2905: sctp (1) >> [COOKIE ACK] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 18:02:41.062663 IP 12.1.1.11.2905 > 12.1.1.1.2905: sctp (1) >> [HB ACK] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 18:02:41.062791 IP 11.1.1.1.2905 > 12.1.1.11.2905: sctp (1) >> [HB REQ] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 18:02:41.361777 IP 11.1.1.1.2905 > 12.1.1.11.2905: sctp (1) >> [HB REQ] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 18:02:41.661772 IP 11.1.1.1.2905 > 12.1.1.11.2905: sctp (1) >> [HB REQ] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 18:02:41.961772 IP 11.1.1.1.2905 > 12.1.1.11.2905: sctp (1) >> [HB REQ] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 18:02:42.161771 IP 11.1.1.1.2905 > 12.1.1.11.2905: sctp (1) >> [HB REQ] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 18:02:42.461770 IP 11.1.1.1.2905 > 12.1.1.11.2905: sctp (1) >> [HB REQ] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 18:02:42.675770 IP 11.1.1.1.2905 > 12.1.1.11.2905: sctp (1) >> [HB REQ] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If we are using single homing, there is no problem on the >> SCTP >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> communication. Below is the TCP trace on eth1 using sctp_test >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 18:09:55.356727 IP 12.1.1.1.2905 > 11.1.1.11.2905: sctp (1) >> [INIT] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [init tag: 32516609] [rwnd: 102400] [OS: 16] [MIS: 16] [init >> TSN: 0] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 18:09:55.356811 IP 11.1.1.11.2905 > 12.1.1.1.2905: sctp (1) >> [INIT ACK] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [init tag: 3168861995] [rwnd: 131072] [OS: 10] [MIS: 16] >> [init TSN: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1877695021] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 18:09:55.357727 IP 12.1.1.1.2905 > 11.1.1.11.2905: sctp (1) >> [COOKIE ECHO] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 18:09:55.357788 IP 11.1.1.11.2905 > 12.1.1.1.2905: sctp (1) >> [COOKIE ACK] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 18:09:55.358724 IP 12.1.1.1.2905 > 11.1.1.11.2905: sctp (1) >> [HB REQ] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 18:09:55.358740 IP 11.1.1.11.2905 > 12.1.1.1.2905: sctp (1) >> [HB ACK] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 18:09:55.379715 IP 12.1.1.1.2905 > 11.1.1.11.2905: sctp (1) >> [DATA] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (B)(E) [TSN: 0] [SID: 0] [SSEQ 0] [PPID 0x3] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 18:09:55.379735 IP 11.1.1.11.2905 > 12.1.1.1.2905: sctp (1) >> [SACK] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [cum ack 0] [a_rwnd 131064] [#gap acks 0] [#dup tsns 0] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 18:09:55.657716 IP 12.1.1.1.2905 > 11.1.1.11.2905: sctp (1) >> [HB REQ] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 18:09:55.657732 IP 11.1.1.11.2905 > 12.1.1.1.2905: sctp (1) >> [HB ACK] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> From the observations, it seems that the LKSCTP library is >> not able to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> use the original local address when multi-homing is being >> used. Is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> there anyway can be resolved it? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> PS >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe >> linux-sctp" in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> More majordomo info at >> http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe >> linux-sctp" in >>>>>>>>>>>> the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >>>>>>>>>>>> More majordomo info at >> http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe >> linux-sctp" in >>>>>>>>> the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >>>>>>>>> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html >>>>>>> >>>> >> >> > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-sctp" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
