All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Chris Brenton <cbrenton@chrisbrenton.org>
To: Scott Hall <halls@aros.net>
Cc: netfilter@lists.netfilter.org
Subject: Re: icmp: 10.1.4.50 unreachable - need to frag (mtu 500) [tos 0xc0]
Date: Tue, 06 Jan 2004 06:23:09 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1073388187.2047.250.camel@grendel> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3FFA5EBD.1000701@aros.net>

GReets Scott,

On Tue, 2004-01-06 at 02:07, Scott Hall wrote:
>
> I am using this setup to share a single T1 pipe for both voice (via IP 
> telephone) and data.  That is the reason for the 500 MTU across the t1 
> link. 

You may find you are going to have this problem a bit more often. See
below.

>  >>>>> Not sure why I don't see the original request <<<<<<<<

What do you mean by "original request"? DNS query? TCP three packet
handshake? Both appear to be missing from your traces. The DNS info
could have still been in cache however.

> 16:48:57.275929 Fasttrack2.machinerytrader.com.http > 
> --PUBLIC_IP--.1308: P 1481515766:1481517126(1360) ack 2518922124 win 
> 65161 (DF)

ACK packet with absolute sequence numbers tells me we missed the initial
handshake somehow. From the window size it looks like we are well into
the data session.

> 16:48:57.275953 --PUBLIC_IP-- > Fasttrack2.machinerytrader.com: icmp: 
> 10.1.4.50 unreachable - need to frag (MTU 500) [tos 0xc0]

Two problems here:
1) A lot of networks, and even some ISP's for that matter, are now
dropping all ICMP due to some of the Window's worms running around.
Don't tell me that its a brain dead idea, you are preaching to the
choir, just letting you know I see people doing it in the wild.

Also, even if the sending system does receive this packet, I'm guessing
it will pitch it. You are telling the remote Web server that the
connection to 10.1.4.50 needs to have its traffic fragmented. I'm
guessing the Web server sees the connection as originating from a public
address. (the NAT address you are using). Since the payload IP does not
match, it will disregard the packet as an unsolicited ICMP error.

> 16:48:57.276111 --PUBLIC_IP--.32769 > ns1.mydomain.com.domain:  25222+ 
> PTR? 17.164.70.63.in-addr.arpa. (43)  (DF)

Weird its doing a reverse lookup, but not a problem.

> 16:59:25.962167 Fasttrack2.machinerytrader.com.http > 
> --cust-publicIP--.29695: P 308:1668(1360) ack 375 win 65161 (DF)

OK, completely new session well that's a few packets into the data
transfer.

> 16:59:25.962189 --PUBLIC_IP-- > Fasttrack2.machinerytrader.com: icmp: 
> --cust-publicIP-- unreachable - need to frag (MTU 500) [tos 0xc0]

There goes our ICMP error with a private address in the payload again.
:)

>  >>>> I see this traffic next but the customer side doesn't receive the 
> packets <<<<<<
> 
> 16:59:33.605043 --cust-publicIP--.29695 > 
> Fasttrack2.machinerytrader.com.http: R 2681907386:2681907386(0) win 0 (DF)

OK, something is weird. If the frag info did not get though we should
have seen the Web site attempt some retransmissions. Also, we're looking
at absolute sequence numbers. I think we again didn't get to see some of
the packets in the session. Are you stopping and restarting your packet
capture?

> 16:59:38.142184 --cust-publicIP--.29714 > 
> Fasttrack2.machinerytrader.com.http: S 2689170753:2689170753(0) win 
> 65280 <mss 1360,nop,nop,sackOK> (DF)
> 16:59:38.174050 Fasttrack2.machinerytrader.com.http > 
> --cust-publicIP--.29714: S 3983995986:3983995986(0) ack 2689170754 win 
> 65535 <mss 1380,nop,nop,sackOK> (DF)
> 16:59:38.178358 --cust-publicIP--.29714 > 
> Fasttrack2.machinerytrader.com.http: . ack 1 win 65280 (DF)

WAHOO! A three packet handshake. This time we got in from the beginning!
:)

> 16:59:38.181116 --cust-publicIP--.29714 > 
> Fasttrack2.machinerytrader.com.http: P 1:430(429) ack 1 win 65280 (DF)
> 16:59:38.216940 Fasttrack2.machinerytrader.com.http > 
> --cust-publicIP--.29714: P 1:241(240) ack 430 win 65106 (DF)

OK, up to here we are good because your MTU did not get exceeded. 

> 16:59:38.220596 Fasttrack2.machinerytrader.com.http > 
> --cust-publicIP--.29714: P 241:1601(1360) ack 430 win 65106 (DF)

And again, we hit an MTU that exceeds you max, so this is were the
problems start. I'm guessing after this we had an outbound ICMP frag
needed, followed by a couple of inbound retransmissions of the above
packet, but it would have been cool to see it in order to confirm.

HTH,
C




  reply	other threads:[~2004-01-06 11:23 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2004-01-06  7:07 icmp: 10.1.4.50 unreachable - need to frag (mtu 500) [tos 0xc0] Scott Hall
2004-01-06 11:23 ` Chris Brenton [this message]
2004-01-06 15:48   ` Scott Hall
2004-01-13  8:02   ` Scott Hall
2004-01-13 15:51     ` Chris Brenton
2004-01-13 16:12       ` Scott Hall
2004-01-13 16:38         ` Chris Brenton
2004-01-13 17:52           ` Scott Hall
2004-01-14 18:11           ` Mark Weaver

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=1073388187.2047.250.camel@grendel \
    --to=cbrenton@chrisbrenton.org \
    --cc=halls@aros.net \
    --cc=netfilter@lists.netfilter.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.