Snort mailing list archives

Re: TCP reserved flags: which is it?


From: Phil Wood <cpw () lanl gov>
Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2002 10:18:28 -0600

Sar-eee,

Everybody is wrong, cause they are refered to in the RFC as
bit 9* and bit 8!  But, that's in relation to the 32 bit word which
which is word 3 of the tcp header (start counting at 0 of course).

   0               ! * 1                   2                   3
   0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
  | OFF=10| | | | |W|E|U|A|P|R|S|F|  Window = 5840                |
  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   data   | reserved  | flags     |
    offset

* ECN-Echo flag
! Congestion Window Reduced flag

So, if we go with the flow, bit W (congestion _W_indow reduced (ECN)**
and bit E (ecn _E_cho sent (ECN))** are the first two bits in the newly(1999)
defined (6->8) bit tcp flags field.  Consequently, they should be numbered
bit 0 and bit 1 of the tcp flags field.  Ah, but what happens to all the 
old documentation that might refer to the Urgent bit as bit 0 or bit 10.
or when the flags fields expands further into the reserved space?

Later,

** See print-tcp.c in tcpdump source from tcpdump.org.

On Sun, Jul 21, 2002 at 10:59:42PM -0700, John Sage wrote:
arf..

Actually, if you had read my initial post, the *real* question was
why snort reported the flags as 12****S* while ACID reports the flags
as flags=21****S*
It was one of the once over lightly reads.

Notice the "1" and the "2" are reversed between the two.

I know *what* the flags mean; I'm just trying to understand why snort
and ACID seem to be reporting them differently...

(That, and I was kinda funnin' with Erek, but he doesn't seem to have
noticed :-)


- John
-- 
"Obviously, we do not want to leave zombies around."

PGP key      http://www.finchhaven.com/pages/gpg_pubkey.html
Fingerprint  FE 97 0C 57 08 43 F3 EB 49 A1 0C D0 8E 0C D0 BE C8 38 CC B5 



On Sun, Jul 21, 2002 at 12:14:27PM -0600, Phil Wood wrote:
On Sat, Jul 20, 2002 at 10:10:00PM -0700, John Sage wrote:
On Wed, Jul 17, 2002 at 11:38:31PM -0700, John Sage wrote:
Received some tcp:25 packets with the reserved flag bits set.

<snip>

What about my question?

Guys?
Take a look at rfc2481 and rfc2914.txt.  Those bits are being used
for explicit congestion control.  Of course it only works if both ends
and intervening routers are participating.  Here is a snippit from rfc 2481:

6.1. TCP

   The following sections describe in detail the proposed use of ECN in
   TCP.  This proposal is described in essentially the same form in
   [Floyd94]. We assume that the source TCP uses the standard congestion
   control algorithms of Slow-start, Fast Retransmit and Fast Recovery
   [RFC 2001].

   This proposal specifies two new flags in the Reserved field of the
   TCP header.  The TCP mechanism for negotiating ECN-Capability uses
   the ECN-Echo flag in the TCP header.  (This was called the ECN Notify
   flag in some earlier documents.)  Bit 9 in the Reserved field of the
   TCP header is designated as the ECN-Echo flag.  The location of the
   6-bit Reserved field in the TCP header is shown in Figure 3 of RFC
   793 [RFC793].


8< snip >8


-------------------------------------------------------
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Welcome to geek heaven.
http://thinkgeek.com/sf
_______________________________________________
Snort-users mailing list
Snort-users () lists sourceforge net
Go to this URL to change user options or unsubscribe:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/snort-users
Snort-users list archive:
http://www.geocrawler.com/redir-sf.php3?list=snort-users

-- 
Phil Wood, cpw () lanl gov



-------------------------------------------------------
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Welcome to geek heaven.
http://thinkgeek.com/sf
_______________________________________________
Snort-users mailing list
Snort-users () lists sourceforge net
Go to this URL to change user options or unsubscribe:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/snort-users
Snort-users list archive:
http://www.geocrawler.com/redir-sf.php3?list=snort-users


Current thread: