I believe you are confusing tcp/ip connection establishment and SSL session
establishment.

As far as my understanding goes:
SSL is an application level protocol, that works on an existing tcp channel.
So, SSL handshake can be thought of as two network applications talking to
each other.
It is obvious that, the moment first SSL handshake packet reaches the
server, the server would change its state and will now start with the
handshake. If anything goes wrong hereafter (Invalid packet, tcp error, lost
packet  ... ), the server's SSL_accept will detect that and report error.

The problem may occur when:
1) Server is waiting for first SSL handshake packet in SSL_accept
2) Client attempts to establish SSL handshake with SSL_connect
3) SSL_connect fails even before it could send the first SSL handshake
packet. So the client has put nothing on the network.
Now, SSL_connect has returned an error in the client, and the server is
still blocked in SSL_accept.

Gayathri,
You are correct about first forking and then attempting SSL_accept. This
will save the main server from blocking into SSL_accept and failing to
server other client connection requests. Here the forked child will be
blocked in SSL_accept though.

David,
As I have already acknowledged in my previous post, the option of using non
blocking socket seems to be the way to go.


I have a few doubts on how a particular scenario can be handled, but I feel
it is a bit off track with respect to the current thread. So I will send a
new post for that.
Thank you everyone for responding.
~ Urjit

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Gayathri Sundar" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <openssl-users@openssl.org>
Sent: Thursday, March 29, 2007 1:02 PM
Subject: RE: SSL_connect and SSL_accept


Yes, I agree with you, but then why would the CLIENT get an ERROR?

>2) The client calls SSL_connect(). The underlying socket is in blocking
>mode
>3) SSL_connect() returns error.
>4) The server does not notice this, and continues to wait in SSL_accept().

if SSL_connect indeed has returned with ERROR..then the SSL_accept should
also return with an ERROR, unless the data transmission was LOST!!!

In ur case the CLIENT will go on retrying sending the same message with
the TCP retransmitting the pkt as no ACK was received on the client
side..and if I am correct..it tries 3 times on linux and returns with an
error..so it does not block FOREVER..there is no concept of blocking
FOREVER..literally..
yes but then NON BLOCKING sockets are ofcourse the best solution esp when
ur appliance is designed for the enterprise markets.

Thanks
--Gayathri

> I am unable to think of a scenerio why ur case is possible unless some
> serious network congestion has developed and pkts were lost..i dont
> see how..but the experts might able to give u a better idea.

You get a SYN, send a SYN ACK, other side sends an ACK, then the other
side's Internet connection goes down due to an extended power failure. You
will be waiting for it to send the first SSL handshake message forever.

Blocking function block until the operation completes, fails, or it is
proven impossible for it to ever succeed.

DS


______________________________________________________________________
OpenSSL Project                                 http://www.openssl.org
User Support Mailing List                    openssl-users@openssl.org
Automated List Manager                           [EMAIL PROTECTED]



****************************************************************************
****
This email message (including any attachments) is for the sole use of the
intended recipient(s)
and may contain confidential, proprietary and privileged information. Any
unauthorized review,
use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended
recipient,
please immediately notify the sender by reply email and destroy all copies
of the original message.
Thank you.

Intoto Inc.

______________________________________________________________________
OpenSSL Project                                 http://www.openssl.org
User Support Mailing List                    openssl-users@openssl.org
Automated List Manager                           [EMAIL PROTECTED]


DISCLAIMER
==========
This e-mail may contain privileged and confidential information which is the 
property of Persistent Systems Pvt. Ltd. It is intended only for the use of the 
individual or entity to which it is addressed. If you are not the intended 
recipient, you are not authorized to read, retain, copy, print, distribute or 
use this message. If you have received this communication in error, please 
notify the sender and delete all copies of this message. Persistent Systems 
Pvt. Ltd. does not accept any liability for virus infected mails.
______________________________________________________________________
OpenSSL Project                                 http://www.openssl.org
User Support Mailing List                    openssl-users@openssl.org
Automated List Manager                           [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to