nanog mailing list archives

Re: Service provider story about tracking down TCP RSTs


From: Garrett Skjelstad <garrett () skjelstad org>
Date: Sat, 1 Sep 2018 13:03:38 -0700

I would love this as a blog post to link folks that are not nanog members.

-Garrett

On Sat, Sep 1, 2018, 11:52 <frnkblk () iname com> wrote:

I want to share a little bit of our journey in tracking down the TCP RSTs
that impacted some of our customers for almost ten weeks.



Almost immediately after we turned up two new Arista border routers in
late July we started receiving a trickle of complaints from customers
regarding their inability to access certain websites (mostly B2B). All the
packet captures showed the standard TCP SYN/SYN-ACK pair, then a TCP RST
from the website after the client sent a TLS/SSL Client Hello. As the
reports continued to come in, we built a Google Doc to keep track and it
became clear that most of the sites were hosted by Incapsula/Imperva, but
there were also a few by Sucuri and Fastly. Knowing that Incapsula provides
DoS protection, we attempted to work with them (providing websites,
source/destination IPs, traceroutes, and packet captures) to find out why
their hosts were issuing our customers a TCP RST, but we made little
progress. We moved some of the affected customers to different IP addresses
but that didn’t resolve the issue. We also asked our customer to work with
the website to see if they would be willing to open a ticket with
Incapsula. In the meantime, customers were getting frustrated! They
couldn’t visit Incapsula-hosted healthcare websites, financial firms,
product dealers, etc. Over the weeks, a few of those customers
purchased/borrowed different routers and some of those didn’t have website
issues anymore. And more than a few of them discovered that the websites
worked fine from home or their mobile phone/hotspot, but not from their
Internet connection with us. You can guess where they were applying
pressure! That said, we didn’t know why a small handful of companies, known
for DoS protection, were issuing TCP RSTs to just some of our customers.



Earlier this week we received four or five more websites from yet another
affected customer, but most of those were with Fastly. By this time, we had
been able to replicate the issue in our lab. Feeling desperate to make some
tangible progress on this issue, I reached out to the Fastly NOC. In less
than 12 hours they provided some helpful feedback, pointing out that a
single traceroute to a Fastly site was hitting two of their POPs (they use
anycast) and because they don’t sync state between POPs the second POP
would naturally issue a TCP RST (sidebar: fascinating blog article on
Fastly’s infrastructure here:
https://www.fastly.com/blog/building-and-scaling-fastly-network-part-2-balancing-requests).
In subsequent email exchanges, the Fastly NOC suggested that it appeared
that we were “spraying flows” (that is, packets related to single client
session were egressing our network via different paths). Because Fastly is
also present with us at an IX (though they weren’t advertising their
anycast IPs at the time), they suggested that we look at how our traffic
egresses our network (IX versus transit) and our routers’ outbound
load-balancing/hashing schemes.



The IX turned up to be a red herring, so I turned my attention to our
transit. Each of our border routers has two BGP sessions over two circuits
to transit provider POP A and two BGP sessions over two circuits to transit
provider POP B, for a total of four BGP sessions per border router, a total
of eight BGP sessions altogether. Starting with our core router, I
confirmed that its ECMP hashing was consistent such that Fastly-bound
traffic always went to border router 1 or border router 2. Then I looked at
the ECMP hashing scheme on our border routers and noticed something unique
– by default Arista also uses TTL:



IPv4 hash fields:

   Source IPv4 Address is ON

   Protocol is ON

   Time-To-Live is ON

   Destination IPv4 Address is ON



Since the source and destination IPs and protocol weren’t changing,
perhaps the TTL was not consistent? I opened the first packet trace in
Wireshark and jackpot – the TTL value was 128 on the SYN but 127 on the
TLS/SSL Client Hello. I adjusted the Arista’s load-balancing profile not to
use TTL and immediately my MTR in the background changed and all the sites
on the lab machine that couldn’t load before … were now loading.



Fastly also pointed me to another article written by Joel Jaeggli (
https://blog.apnic.net/2018/01/11/ipv6-flow-label-misuse-hashing/) that
discusses IPv6 flow labels – we removed that from the border routers’ IPv6
hash fields, too.



I reviewed the packet traces today and noticed that TTL values remained
consistent at 128 **behind** the router CPE. In packet captures on the
WAN interface of the router CPE I see that the SYN remains at 128, but the
TLS/Client Hello is properly decremented to 127. So, it appears that some
router CPE (and there were a variety of makes and models) are doing
something special to certain packets and not decrementing the TTL.

This explains why:

   - our customers had issues with all their devices behind their router
   CPE
   - the issue remained regardless of what public IP address their router
   CPE obtained via DHCP or was assigned
   - some customers who changed their router CPE didn’t have the issue
   anymore – they got lucky with a router that doesn’t adjust/reset the TTL
   - why customers who used our managed Wi-Fi router did not see the
   issue, because that model doesn’t apparently manipulate the TTL, at least
   not in an inconsistent way.



Lesson learned: review a device’s hashing mechanism before going into
production.



For those interested, I have links to the packet traces below my
signature, showing the inconsistent TTL values.



Thanks again to the fantastic group of folk at the Fastly NOC who so ably
pointed us in the right direction!



Frank



https://www.premieronline.net/~fbulk/example1.pcapng

https://www.premieronline.net/~fbulk/example2.pcapng

https://www.premieronline.net/~fbulk/example3.pcapng


Current thread: