top button
Flag Notify
    Connect to us
      Site Registration

Site Registration

Handling multiple path SCTP_ADDR_CONFIRMED primitive under event SCTP_PEER_ADDR_CHANGE?

+1 vote
466 views

When performing the following test on SCTP multi-homed association, I am seeing the SCTP_ADDR_CONFIRMED primitive coming back When bring back the last path up.

Could I handle the CONFIRMED primitive like the AVAILABLE primitive? Are there scenario that The confirmed is different from the AVAILABLE?

Event that I see the AVAILABLE and CONFIRMED generated

Path1 down - SCTP_ADDR_UNREACHABLE
Path2 down (assoc down) - commLost
Path1 up - commUp and then SCTP_ADDR_UNREACHABLE on path2
Path2 up - SCTP_ADDR_CONFIRMED on 1 side of the connection and SCTP_ADDR_AVAILABLE on the other side of the connection

posted Sep 4, 2014 by anonymous

Looking for an answer?  Promote on:
Facebook Share Button Twitter Share Button LinkedIn Share Button

Similar Questions
+1 vote
SCTP multihoming: Client does not try the another Path in case heartbeat ask is not received?

It is found that IP X haven't replied heartbeat Ack to IP A but our client will not try another path B->Y. Would you advise how B->Y path can be enable?

lksctp client IP info:
Primary IP: A
Secondary IP: B

Server primary IP: X
Server secondary IP: Y

0 votes
Linux: Adding SCTP_SENDALL support

I'd like to add SCTP_SENDALL support to the kernel and lksctp-tools to port a FreeBSD project to Linux. Does anyone have pointers on where to get started or who to talk to about this? Is there any reason it's not already implemented besides just no one doing the work yet?

0 votes
packet->transport->asoc = NULL in sctp_packet_transmit

I'm adding experimental support for UDP encapsulation of SCTP packets. I got most of if working well. However, I noticed a NULL pointer dereference in sctp_packet_transmit as I assumed that packet->transport->asoc weren't NULL so I tried to access tunneling information that I store in packet->transport->asoc->ep->base.

In what circumstances is assoc NULL in sctp_packet_transmit?

+2 votes
Looking for a formal LKSCTP compliance statement?

Is LKSCTP 100% compliant with the following?

RFC 2960 - SCTP (obsoleted by RFC 4960)
RFC 3309 - SCTP Checksum Change (obsoleted by RFC 4960)
RFC 3758 - SCTP Partial Reliability Extension
RFC 3873 - SCTP MIB
RFC 4460 - SCTP Errata and Issues
RFC 4895 - Authenticated Chunks for SCTP
RFC 4960 - SCTP
RFC 5061 - SCTP Dynamic Address Reconfiguration
RFC 5062 - Security Attacks Against SCTP

Any pointers are welcome?

...