![]() > What I see on the FreeBSD side with tcpdump is repeated "bad-len 0" > tcpdump sees the segment before TCP segmentation. > segmentation but Doug's tcpdump looks completely normal to me since > It's possible for controller to corrupt the TCP segment during > segment with tcpdump on TX path, probably TSO was not used for the > segment, you should see a series of small TCP packets on receiver tcpdump sees a (big) TCP segment right before > show a difference in behaviour compared to what Doug sees. > tcpdump (on the FreeBSD side) and Wireshark (on the Windows side) that ![]() > I can provide packet captures on both ends of a LAN segment using both > This is not the behaviour I see with em(4) on a 82573E with all defaults Disable TSO with ifconfig if it interferes with your ssldump. > You have TSO enabled on the interface, so large outgoing TCP packet is pretty normal. Could this possibly be related to the hardware checksums? ssldump complains about the packet too and stops monitoring. This is part of a SSL/TLS exchange and one side or the other is hanging on this and just dropping the connection. There is a router and switch between them. > The indicated packet length is 3946 and the load of data shown is that size. > It sent the following packet: (data content abbreviated) > media: Ethernet autoselect (100baseTX ) > Monitoring a tcpdump between two systems, a FreeBSD 9.1 system has the following interface: > On Wed, at 5:37 PM, YongHyeon PYUN wrote: > On 13 February 2013, at 22:45, YongHyeon PYUN wrote:
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |