RE: TCP Ack numbers suddenly regress [7:56189]

2002-10-25 Thread Matthew Tayler
Thanks for the info, but at this time it looks as though MFC was correct.

Both hosts are running Tru64 (DEC Unix) and for whatever reasons the system
admin for Host B has 'enabled' modified keepalives and modified the timers -
amongst other things - at which probes are sent to 37 seconds, which fits
with the problems we are seeing. Actually what they have set is 75 half
seconds to wait before issuing a probe.

What we now also know is that the behaviour for sending ACK minus 1 is
correct and that also the ACK's in response to the probe at least according
to DEC/Compaq/HP may not be received causing a reset. The ACK minus 1
forces the other end to send back the correct ACK and in fact saying I am
still here. Its down to host implementations as to how this is done but the
standard practice is as described above or more precisely in Vol II TCP/IP
Illustrated.

Anyway having persuaded the system admin guy to stop playing around with key
systems as his personal toys the timers have been reset to default and all
is now well.

Thanks again

Matt T

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:nobody;groupstudy.com]
Sent: 24 October 2002 17:55
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: TCP Ack numbers suddenly regress [7:56189]


The keepalive process shouldn't cause ACKs to go backwards. It should cause
them to stay the same. This doesn't sound like a keepalive  situation which
should proceed smoothly. This situation involves a RESET which usually
indicates a problem of some sort, although possibly just a minor problem. It
sounds more like a bug in the TCP implementation to me. We would have to see
both sides of the conversation, including what both sides send, not just
what they ACK, to troubleshoot this.

The TCP RFC doesn't cover keepalives. They are mentioned in the Host
Requirements RFC 1122, which is pretty critical of them, but admits that
they MAY be included in a TCP implementation.

After 2 hours (by default) a UNIX system that is using keepalives sends
either any empty segment or a segment with one byte of garbage data. For the
sequence number, it uses the sequence number of the last byte already sent.
This should cause the other side to send the last ACK that it sent.

Example:

Host A sends bytes 100-200, SEQ number = 100
Host B ACKs, ACK number = 201
two hours
Host A sends segment with SEQ number = 200
Host B ACKS, ACK number = 201

To troubleshoot, you can't just look at ACKs anyway. You have to look at
both sides of the conversation. Also look at the timing. Did 2 hours go by?

Also, what's the actual user complaint? Or is this just something you
happened to notice in a trace?

What is the network topology? Where are these hosts and what's in between
them? Is there some sort of feature running between them that messes with
TCP? For example a firewall or a router that does TCP Intercept??

___

Priscilla Oppenheimer
www.troubleshootingnetworks.com
www.priscilla.com


Matthew F. Crane wrote:

 Ok you don't say what they host systems are but I am going to
 guess Unix of
 some variety, in which case has anyone been playing around with
 the
 keepalive timers ?

 If the session keepalive timer is reached a probe is sent with
 the ACK
 number set to ACK-1 i.e. telling the other end that the
 recipient lied
 previously when it said it had received all the data. This
 forces the origin
 to resend with the correct ACK number

 TCP/IP Illustrated Vol 2 p830

 There are probably other instances where this is done but
 that's the one
 I've come across most often.

 MFC

 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:nobody;groupstudy.com]On
 Behalf Of
 Matthew Tayler
 Sent: 24 October 2002 09:04
 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Subject: TCP Ack numbers suddenly regress [7:56189]


 Anyone come across a situation where the ACK number suddenly
 steps back 1
 and the link then resets ?

 Host A to Host B is running fine with the app using port 2400
 on A talking
 to an app on B using ports 3564  3565 are in use. We have
 several traces
 showing the steady increase of sequence numbers then all of a
 sudden the ACK
 number takes step back by 1. There are no FIN segments in the
 preceeding
 traffic, but the now regressed ACK number is repeated in 7
 segments sent and
 then a reset segment is issued and the two start exchanging
 data again.

 I am not allowed to post any of the data from the trace given
 the nature of
 the two systems involved, but here is an example of the way the
 ACK numbers
 run

 From A to B port 2400 to 3564
 4567 is ACK'd
 4785 .
 4948
 4947

 From A to B port 2400 to 3565
 466 is ACK'd
 483 .
 500
 499

 The link between the two is fine during this problem,
 utilisation drops but
 is nevera bove 20% anyway. Both host applicationms are still
 running and
 there are no process issues. The Cisco kit at either end is
 happy no error
 messages or the like so I we knows its host/app related.

 I can't find anything this specific in the archives

TCP Ack numbers suddenly regress [7:56189]

2002-10-24 Thread Matthew Tayler
Anyone come across a situation where the ACK number suddenly steps back 1
and the link then resets ?

Host A to Host B is running fine with the app using port 2400 on A talking
to an app on B using ports 3564  3565 are in use. We have several traces
showing the steady increase of sequence numbers then all of a sudden the ACK
number takes step back by 1. There are no FIN segments in the preceeding
traffic, but the now regressed ACK number is repeated in 7 segments sent and
then a reset segment is issued and the two start exchanging data again.

I am not allowed to post any of the data from the trace given the nature of
the two systems involved, but here is an example of the way the ACK numbers
run

From A to B port 2400 to 3564
4567 is ACK'd
4785 .
4948
4947

From A to B port 2400 to 3565
466 is ACK'd
483 .
500
499

The link between the two is fine during this problem, utilisation drops but
is nevera bove 20% anyway. Both host applicationms are still running and
there are no process issues. The Cisco kit at either end is happy no error
messages or the like so I we knows its host/app related.

I can't find anything this specific in the archives and the nearest any of
my textbooks come is to say a FIN has been issued - which the trace says is
not the case.

The reason for asking is that I didn't think it was possible to regress the
sequence numbers, with the exception of the example from TCP/IP Illustrated
Vol 2 noted above.

Any ideas would be appreciated.

Thanks

Matt T


Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=56189t=56189
--
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]



RE: CCDA beta exam topic ECNM [7:55829]

2002-10-18 Thread Matthew Tayler
Is it nit just a 'poshed' up title for the old Access Distribution Core
model ?

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:nobody;groupstudy.com]On Behalf Of
Andy Barkl
Sent: 18 October 2002 06:25
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: CCDA beta exam topic ECNM [7:55829]


Thank you for the response. I thought perhaps I was going crazy (not
that I'm not already) because I couldn't find anything.

-Original Message-
From: Priscilla Oppenheimer [mailto:nobody;groupstudy.com]
Sent: Thursday, October 17, 2002 7:34 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: CCDA beta exam topic ECNM [7:55829]

Andy Barkl wrote:

 The new CCDA beta exam lists many new topics including;
 applying design solutions using the Enterprise Composite
 Network Model (ECNM).

I've never heard of such a model. I don't think it's an
industry-standard
model.


 I'm having difficulty locating anything on CCO and wonder if
 anyone can offer alternative locations or resources?

I couldn't find anything either. Hmm. Doesn't bode well for the beta. It
sounds like you would have to have access to the beta class to pass the
beta
test. That's not good. The old CCDA was passable by someone with design
experience even if they didn't know Cisco made-up marketing terms. And I
think that was a good thing. :-)

Also, the old class taught design methods that could be applied
regardless
of new marketing solutions. The new approach may be more cookbook or
based
on specific models, which I think would be unfortunate. If you read most
descriptions of specific models, they say this may not work for your
network. It's better to teach methods that will work for any network.

Back to the so-called Enterprise Composite Network Model, my guess is
that
it has something to do with Cisco's SAFE security blueprint. There's
more
info here:

http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/779/largeent/issues/security/safe.html

Good luck!
___

Priscilla Oppenheimer
www.troubleshootingnetworks.com
www.priscilla.com


 Thanks!




Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=55888t=55829
--
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]



How fast do bits travel ? [7:41192]

2002-04-11 Thread Matthew Tayler

Ok I have spent ages trying to find an answer to this question, and probably
only added to my confusion. You know how it is you spend ages looking at
something and become snow blind or get tunnel vision or whatever, but I
cannot see the answer to the following:

How far does a bit travel in say 1 second or put another way how long does a
bit take to travel a certain distance ?

I understand, or think I do that if the line is say 128kbps then I can, in
theory at least, expect 128,000 (approx) bits start down that line every
second.

But how long do they take to reach the other end, assuming a point to point
link and both ends being the same speed, obviously.

There has to be a nice simple formula for this somewhere, you know the sort
of thing x= line speed, y = distance z = time etc

Any ideas or poitners would be appreciated

Thanks


Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=41192t=41192
--
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]



OT: Stitched up on .NET [7:38919]

2002-03-20 Thread Matthew Tayler

My boss has landed me in it and I have to do some form of presentation on
Thursday of the value of .NET. Being told 20 minutes ago hasn't helped the
situation.

Ok I can out about what it does or allegedly does, but has anyone any idea
where to find critical assessments of .NET please

Thanks in advance

Matt T


Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=38919t=38919
--
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]



CCSI and how to get there [7:37938]

2002-03-12 Thread Matthew Tayler

Ok I have tried cco - which gives very little away - and the Groupstudy
archives which seem to relate to ICRC and other out of date material.

How I get to CCSI ?

Basically I have an inheritance - with certain conditions - which should
finance the process, but, what's the process. I would prefer not to be tied
in to an employer as part of it, if that makes sense.

The aim being to be come a freelance trainer.

Thanks for any advice

Matthew


Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=37938t=37938
--
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]



RE: ACL Gurus [7:27361]

2001-11-26 Thread Matthew Tayler

Ok I am a little confused here, but

1. What does access-list 101 actually deny ?
2. If you permit all ip are you not also allowing all tcp  udp ?

Matt T
Jeff wrote:
 
 Looking to block icmp-echo on my external router... just want
 to doublecheck
 that I'm putting these on the right interfaces. Please,
 suggestions welcome!
 
 Cheers,
 Jeff
 access-list 101 permit icmp x.x.54.0 0.0.0.255 any echo
 
 access-list 101 permit icmp x.x.55.0 0.0.0.255 any echo
 
 *Permits internal network to ping any host
 
 access-list 101 permit ip any any
 
 *Permits any other traffic to and from the network. Need for
 the explicit
 deny
 
 
 
 access-list 102 permit icmp host x.x.x.x any echo-reply
 
 *Permits a ping reply from ISP servers for monitoring
 
 access-list 102 permit icmp any any packet-too-big
 
 *Permits Fragmentation Required ICMP packets (Used of MTU-PD)
 
 access-list 102 deny   icmp any any echo-reply
 
 deny any echo reply from any other sources
 
 
 
 access-list 102 deny   icmp any x.x.54.0 0.0.0.255 echo
 
 access-list 102 deny   icmp any x.x.55.0 0.0.0.255 echo
 
 deny any echo from any other sources
 
 access-list 102 permit ip any any
 
 *Permits any other traffic to and from the network. Needed due
 to the
 explicit deny rule.
 
 
 
 Both Access-list are applied to the Serial Interfaces of the
 Edge router.
 Access list 102 is assigned to inbound traffic and Access list
 101 is
 assigned to outbound traffic. See below..
 
 
 
 Internet (same ISP, different BGP peers)
 
 
 
 S0/0   S0/1
 
\  /
 
 \/
 
  \  /
 
   Edge Router
 
   |
 
E0/0
 
   |
 
FW
 
   |
 
LAN
 
 x.x.54.0 and x.x.55.0 networks
 
 




Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=27392t=27361
--
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]



RE: Spanning Tree Protocol [7:26538]

2001-11-19 Thread Matthew Tayler

Ok dumb question of the day, what do you mean by Big Endian  Little Endian
please ?

Priscilla Oppenheimer wrote:
 
 At 10:12 PM 11/16/01, Kane, Christopher A. wrote:
 Someone was a Douglas Adams fan?
 
 Of course! Also another cool thing about 42 is that it's a
 palindrome (the
 same backwards and forwards in binary) and avoided the Little
 Endian/ Big
 Endian wars!
 
 Priscilla
 
 
 -Original Message-
 From: Priscilla Oppenheimer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
 Sent: Friday, November 16, 2001 8:27 PM
 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Subject: Re: Spanning Tree Protocol [7:26538]
 
 
 At 04:55 PM 11/16/01, John Neiberger wrote:
  You asked that question right when I had EtherPeek running
 on my PC.
  So, the answer is:
  
  0180.c200.
  
  Source and Destination SAP:  0x42 :-)   See?  The answer
 *is* 42!
 
 According to Radia Perlman, the IEEE chose this SAP on
 purpose. ;-)
 
 
Randy Lopez  11/16/01 2:27:57 PM 
  What Multicast address does STP use?
 
 
 Priscilla Oppenheimer
 http://www.priscilla.com
 
 
 Priscilla Oppenheimer
 http://www.priscilla.com
 
 




Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=26693t=26538
--
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]