> -----Original Message-----
> From: Paolo Abeni <[email protected]> 
> Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2025 11:14 AM
> To: Chia-Yu Chang (Nokia) <[email protected]>; 
> [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; 
> [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; 
> [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; 
> [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; 
> [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; 
> [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; 
> [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; 
> [email protected]; [email protected]; Koen De Schepper (Nokia) 
> <[email protected]>; [email protected]; 
> [email protected]; [email protected]; cheshire 
> <[email protected]>; [email protected]; [email protected]; Vidhi Goel 
> <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 net-next 08/13] tcp: accecn: retransmit SYN/ACK 
> without AccECN option or non-AccECN SYN/ACK
> 
> 
> CAUTION: This is an external email. Please be very careful when clicking 
> links or opening attachments. See the URL nok.it/ext for additional 
> information.
> 
> 
> 
> On 10/13/25 7:03 PM, [email protected] wrote:
> > From: Chia-Yu Chang <[email protected]>
> >
> > If the TCP Server has not received an ACK to acknowledge its SYN/ACK 
> > after the normal TCP timeout or it receives a second SYN with a 
> > request for AccECN support, then either the SYN/ACK might just have 
> > been lost, e.g. due to congestion, or a middlebox might be blocking 
> > AccECN Options. To expedite connection setup in deployment scenarios 
> > where AccECN path traversal might be problematic, the TCP Server 
> > SHOULD retransmit the SYN/ACK, but with no AccECN Option.
> >
> > If this retransmission times out, to expedite connection setup, the 
> > TCP Server SHOULD retransmit the SYN/ACK with (AE,CWR,ECE) = (0,0,0) 
> > and no AccECN Option, but it remains in AccECN feedback mode.
> >
> > This follows Section 3.2.3.2.2 of AccECN spec (RFC9768).
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Chia-Yu Chang <[email protected]>
> > ---
> >  include/net/tcp_ecn.h | 14 ++++++++++----  net/ipv4/tcp_output.c |  2 
> > +-
> >  2 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/include/net/tcp_ecn.h b/include/net/tcp_ecn.h index 
> > c66f0d944e1c..97a3a7f36aff 100644
> > --- a/include/net/tcp_ecn.h
> > +++ b/include/net/tcp_ecn.h
> > @@ -651,10 +651,16 @@ static inline void tcp_ecn_clear_syn(struct sock 
> > *sk, struct sk_buff *skb)  static inline void  
> > tcp_ecn_make_synack(const struct request_sock *req, struct tcphdr *th)  
> > {
> > -     if (tcp_rsk(req)->accecn_ok)
> > -             tcp_accecn_echo_syn_ect(th, tcp_rsk(req)->syn_ect_rcv);
> > -     else if (inet_rsk(req)->ecn_ok)
> > -             th->ece = 1;
> > +     if (req->num_retrans < 1 || req->num_timeout < 1) {
> 
> I think the above condition does not match the commit message. Should be:
>         if (!req->num_retrans && !req->num_timeout) {
>
> /P

Hi Paolo,

This patch includes two differetn SYN/ACK retransmissions:
In the first retransmited SYN/ACK, the retransmitted SYN/ACK will not include 
AccECN option.
This uses the condition of "req->num_retrans >1" in tcp_synack_options().

In the second retransmitted SYN/ACK, the retransmitted SYN/ACK will further set 
ACE=0.
This uses the condition of "req->num_retrans>1 && req->num_timeout>1" in 
tcp_ecn_make_synack().

I was thinking, in the next version, I could update the commit message to 
clarify it.

Chia-Yu

Reply via email to