From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: TCP connection closed without FIN or RST
Date: Fri, 03 Nov 2017 06:00:10 -0700
Message-ID: <1509714010.2849.41.camel@edumazet-glaptop3.roam.corp.google.com>
References: <CAHjP37HOFvQyitEC1s73PHoj120AhE6C6N+FXGUfbd82XO+GQg@mail.gmail.com>
         <1509568471.3828.50.camel@edumazet-glaptop3.roam.corp.google.com>
         <1509569515.3828.53.camel@edumazet-glaptop3.roam.corp.google.com>
         <CAHjP37GkjJyY_6GsVpiZugp+DOKbA8bV2a77iKrAnxrn80Q9Rw@mail.gmail.com>
         <1509573771.3828.58.camel@edumazet-glaptop3.roam.corp.google.com>
         <CAHjP37FyGBmrEi7peAsHBfU=-BzrAafb42RMyjcOoieDsN0vrg@mail.gmail.com>
         <1509577617.3828.62.camel@edumazet-glaptop3.roam.corp.google.com>
         <CAHjP37FeHAps-TYjZk+-yfyDoZJ7yoZsx_yRobZW4+M=eNitNQ@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: netdev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>
To: Vitaly Davidovich <vitalyd@gmail.com>
Return-path: <netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mail-pf0-f176.google.com ([209.85.192.176]:52309 "EHLO
        mail-pf0-f176.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S1755934AbdKCNAN (ORCPT
        <rfc822;netdev@vger.kernel.org>); Fri, 3 Nov 2017 09:00:13 -0400
Received: by mail-pf0-f176.google.com with SMTP id e64so2143837pfk.9
        for <netdev@vger.kernel.org>; Fri, 03 Nov 2017 06:00:12 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAHjP37FeHAps-TYjZk+-yfyDoZJ7yoZsx_yRobZW4+M=eNitNQ@mail.gmail.com>
Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <netdev.vger.kernel.org>

On Fri, 2017-11-03 at 08:41 -0400, Vitaly Davidovich wrote:
> Hi Eric,
> 
> Ran a few more tests yesterday with packet captures, including a
> capture on the client.  It turns out that the client stops ack'ing
> entirely at some point in the conversation - the last advertised
> client window is not even close to zero (it's actually ~348K).  So
> there's complete radio silence from the client for some reason, even
> though it does send back ACKs early on in the conversation.  So yes,
> as far as the server is concerned, the client is completely gone and
> tcp_retries2 rightfully breaches eventually once the server retrans go
> unanswered long (and for sufficient times) enough.
> 
> What's odd though is the packet capture on the client shows the server
> retrans packets arriving, so it's not like the segments don't reach
> the client.  I'll keep investigating, but if you (or anyone else
> reading this) knows of circumstances that might cause this, I'd
> appreciate any tips on where/what to look at.


Might be a middle box issue ?  Like a firewall connection tracking
having some kind of timeout if nothing is sent on one direction ?

What output do you have from client side with :

ss -temoi dst <server_ip>