Home > php教程 > php手册 > Linux下超时重传时间(RTO)的实现探究

Linux下超时重传时间(RTO)的实现探究

WBOY
Release: 2016-06-13 08:44:43
Original
1082 people have browsed it

Linux下超时重传时间(RTO)的实现探究

最近出现了网络超时的问题要排查,大致按照如图思路去排查

1.排除代码逻辑问题,TCP相关可能的BUG,内核参数等问题;

2.排查KVM问题时,在同一个宿主机的不同KVM上,复现了超时问题。

发现大部分异常连接时长都在1s左右,通过抓包分析,可以看到这部分的包被重传了,重传的时间固定为1秒。

这里重传时间为什么是1秒呢,相关的标准和实际实现是怎样的呢?

本文主要讨论的就是这部分内容(基于centos的2.6.32-358)

RFC标准


超时重传时间(RTO)是由当前网络状况(RTT),然后根据一个算法来决定。这部分相关内容《TCP/IP详解卷1》中有提到,但是已经过时了。

去RFC查了下,重传超时相关最新的是RFC6298,他更新了RFC1122并且废弃了RFC2988

稍微介绍一下其中内容,有兴趣的可以点进去看

RFC6298

1 重申了RTO的基本计算方法:

首先有个通过时钟得到的时间参数RTO_MIN

初始化:

第一次计算:

以后的计算:

RTO的最小值建议是1秒,最大值必须大于60秒

2 对于同一个包的多次重传,必须使用Karn算法,也就是刚才看到的双倍增长

另外RTT采样不能使用重传的包,除非开启了timestamps参数(利用该参数可以准确计算出RTT)

3 当4*RTTVAR趋向于0时,得到的值必须向RTO_MIN时间靠近

经验上时钟越准确越好,最好误差在100ms内

4 RTO计时器的管理

(1)发送数据(包括重传时),检查计时器是否启动,若没有则启动。当收到该数据的ACK时删除计时器

(2)使用RTO = RTO * 2的方式进行退避

(3)新的FALLBACK特性:当计时器在等待SYN报文时过期,且当前TCP实现使用了小于3秒的RTO,那么该连接对的RTO必须被重设为3秒,重设的RTO将用在正式数据的传输上(就是三次握手结束以后)


对linux的实际实现进行抓包分析

三次握手的syn包发送

123456 01:00:00.129688 IP 172.16.3.14.1868 > 172.16.10.40.80: Flags [S], seq 3774079837, win 14600, options [mss 1460,nop,nop,sackOK,nop,wscale 7], length 001:00:01.129065 IP 172.16.3.14.1868 > 172.16.10.40.80: Flags [S], seq 3774079837, win 14600, options [mss 1460,nop,nop,sackOK,nop,wscale 7], length 001:00:03.129063 IP 172.16.3.14.1868 > 172.16.10.40.80: Flags [S], seq 3774079837, win 14600, options [mss 1460,nop,nop,sackOK,nop,wscale 7], length 001:00:07.129074 IP 172.16.3.14.1868 > 172.16.10.40.80: Flags [S], seq 3774079837, win 14600, options [mss 1460,nop,nop,sackOK,nop,wscale 7], length 001:00:15.129072 IP 172.16.3.14.1868 > 172.16.10.40.80: Flags [S], seq 3774079837, win 14600, options [mss 1460,nop,nop,sackOK,nop,wscale 7], length 001:00:31.129128 IP 172.16.3.14.1868 > 172.16.10.40.80: Flags [S], seq 3774079837, win 14600, options [mss 1460,nop,nop,sackOK,nop,wscale 7], length 0

从1秒起双倍递增

值得注意是实质上第五次超时以后等到第六次,才会通知上层连接超时,那一共是63秒

三次握手的syncak包发送

1234567 01:17:20.084839 IP 172.16.3.15.2535 > 172.16.3.14.80: Flags [S], seq 1297135388, win 14600, options [mss 1460,nop,nop,sackOK,nop,wscale 7], length 001:17:20.084908 IP 172.16.3.14.80 > 172.16.3.15.2535: Flags [S.], seq 1194120443, ack 1297135389, win 14600, options [mss 1460,nop,nop,sackOK,nop,wscale 7], length 001:17:21.284093 IP 172.16.3.14.80 > 172.16.3.15.2535: Flags [S.], seq 1194120443, ack 1297135389, win 14600, options [mss 1460,nop,nop,sackOK,nop,wscale 7], length 001:17:23.284088 IP 172.16.3.14.80 > 172.16.3.15.2535: Flags [S.], seq 1194120443, ack 1297135389, win 14600, options [mss 1460,nop,nop,sackOK,nop,wscale 7], length 001:17:27.284095 IP 172.16.3.14.80 > 172.16.3.15.2535: Flags [S.], seq 1194120443, ack 1297135389, win 14600, options [mss 1460,nop,nop,sackOK,nop,wscale 7], length 001:17:35.284097 IP 172.16.3.14.80 > 172.16.3.15.2535: Flags [S.], seq 1194120443, ack 1297135389, win 14600, options [mss 1460,nop,nop,sackOK,nop,wscale 7], length 001:17:51.284093 IP 172.16.3.14.80 > 172.16.3.15.2535: Flags [S.], seq 1194120443, ack 1297135389, win 14600, options [mss 1460,nop,nop,sackOK,nop,wscale 7], length 0

从1秒起双倍递增

正常的数据包发送

12345678910111213141516 01:32:20.443757 IP 172.16.3.15.2548 > 172.16.3.14.80: Flags [P.], seq 3319667389:3319667400, ack 1233846614, win 115, length 1101:32:20.644600 IP 172.16.3.15.2548 > 172.16.3.14.80: Flags [P.], seq 3319667389:3319667400, ack 1233846614, win 115, length 1101:32:21.046579 IP 172.16.3.15.2548 > 172.16.3.14.80: Flags [P.], seq 3319667389:3319667400, ack 1233846614, win 115, length 1101:32:21.850632 IP 172.16.3.15.2548 > 172.16.3.14.80: Flags [P.], seq 3319667389:3319667400, ack 1233846614, win 115, length 1101:32:23.458555 IP 172.16.3.15.2548 > 172.16.3.14.80: Flags [P.], seq 3319667389:3319667400, ack 1233846614, win 115, length 1101:32:26.674594 IP 172.16.3.15.2548 > 172.16.3.14.80: Flags [P.], seq 3319667389:3319667400, ack 1233846614, win 115, length 1101:32:33.106601 IP 172.16.3.15.2548 > 172.16.3.14.80: Flags [P.], seq 3319667389:3319667400, ack 1233846614, win 115, length 1101:32:45.970567 IP 172.16.3.15.2548 > 172.16.3.14.80: Flags [P.], seq 3319667389:3319667400, ack 1233846614, win 115, length 1101:33:11.698415 IP 172.16.3.15.2548 > 172.16.3.14.80: Flags [P.], seq 3319667389:3319667400, ack 1233846614, win 115, length 1101:34:03.154300 IP 172.16.3.15.2548 > 172.16.3.14.80: Flags [P.], seq 3319667389:3319667400, ack 1233846614, win 115, length 1101:35:46.065892 IP 172.16.3.15.2548 > 172.16.3.14.80: Flags [P.], seq 3319667389:3319667400, ack 1233846614, win 115, length 1101:37:46.065382 IP 172.16.3.15.2548 > 172.16.3.14.80: Flags [P.], seq 3319667389:3319667400, ack 1233846614, win 115, length 1101:39:46.064917 IP 172.16.3.15.2548 > 172.16.3.14.80: Flags [P.], seq 3319667389:3319667400, ack 1233846614, win 115, length 1101:41:46.064466 IP 172.16.3.15.2548 > 172.16.3.14.80: Flags [P.], seq 3319667389:3319667400, ack 1233846614, win 115, length 1101:43:46.064060 IP 172.16.3.15.2548 > 172.16.3.14.80: Flags [P.], seq 3319667389:3319667400, ack 1233846614, win 115, length 1101:45:46.063675 IP 172.16.3.15.2548 > 172.16.3.14.80: Flags [P.], seq 3319667389:3319667400, ack 1233846614, win 115, length 11

从0.2秒起双倍递增,最大到120秒,一共15次

值得注意的是从32分开始,47分才结束,也就是15分钟25秒左右

linux是否支持了FALLBACK特性,做一个简单的测试

123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930 server开启iptables后,client连接server,在5次超时次数内关闭iptables23:35:01.036565 IP 172.16.3.14.6071 > 172.16.10.40.12345: Flags [S], seq 2364912154, win 14600, options [mss 1460,nop,nop,sackOK,nop,wscale 7], length 023:35:02.036152 IP 172.16.3.14.6071 > 172.16.10.40.12345: Flags [S], seq 2364912154, win 14600, options [mss 1460,nop,nop,sackOK,nop,wscale 7], length 023:35:04.036126 IP 172.16.3.14.6071 > 172.16.10.40.12345: Flags [S], seq 2364912154, win 14600, options [mss 1460,nop,nop,sackOK,nop,wscale 7], length 023:35:08.036127 IP 172.16.3.14.6071 > 172.16.10.40.12345: Flags [S], seq 2364912154, win 14600, options [mss 1460,nop,nop,sackOK,nop,wscale 7], length 023:35:16.036131 IP 172.16.3.14.6071 > 172.16.10.40.12345: Flags [S], seq 2364912154, win 14600, options [mss 1460,nop,nop,sackOK,nop,wscale 7], length 023:35:16.036842 IP 172.16.10.40.12345 > 172.16.3.14.6071: Flags [S.], seq 3634006739, ack 2364912155, win 14600, options [mss 1460], length 023:35:16.036896 IP 172.16.3.14.6071 > 172.16.10.40.12345: Flags [.], ack 3634006740, win 14600, length 0接着server开启iptables后,client发送数据包,在15次超时次数内关闭iptables23:35:48.129273 IP 172.16.3.14.6071 > 172.16.10.40.12345: Flags [P.], seq 2364912155:2364912156, ack 3634006740, win 14600, length 123:35:51.129120 IP 172.16.3.14.6071 > 172.16.10.40.12345: Flags [P.], seq 2364912155:2364912156, ack 3634006740, win 14600, length 123:35:57.129070 IP 172.16.3.14.6071 > 172.16.10.40.12345: Flags [P.], seq 2364912155:2364912156, ack 3634006740, win 14600, length 123:36:09.129068 IP 172.16.3.14.6071 > 172.16.10.40.12345: Flags [P.], seq 2364912155:2364912156, ack 3634006740, win 14600, length 123:36:09.129802 IP 172.16.10.40.12345 > 172.16.3.14.6071: Flags [.], ack 2364912156, win 14600, length 0接着server不开iptables时,client发送数据包23:36:15.217231 IP 172.16.3.14.6071 > 172.16.10.40.12345: Flags [P.], seq 2364912156:2364912157, ack 3634006740, win 14600, length 123:36:15.217766 IP 172.16.10.40.12345 > 172.16.3.14.6071: Flags [.], ack 2364912157, win 14600, length 0接着server开启iptables,client发送数据包23:36:26.658172 IP 172.16.3.14.6071 > 172.16.10.40.12345: Flags [P.], seq 2364912157:2364912158, ack 3634006740, win 14600, length 123:36:26.859055 IP 172.16.3.14.6071 > 172.16.10.40.12345: Flags [P.], seq 2364912157:2364912158, ack 3634006740, win 14600, length 123:36:27.261065 IP 172.16.3.14.6071 > 172.16.10.40.12345: Flags [P.], seq 2364912157:2364912158, ack 3634006740, win 14600, length 123:36:28.065106 IP 172.16.3.14.6071 > 172.16.10.40.12345: Flags [P.], seq 2364912157:2364912158, ack 3634006740, win 14600, length 123:36:29.673132 IP 172.16.3.14.6071 > 172.16.10.40.12345: Flags [P.], seq 2364912157:2364912158, ack 3634006740, win 14600, length 123:36:32.889068 IP 172.16.3.14.6071 > 172.16.10.40.12345: Flags [P.], seq 2364912157:2364912158, ack 3634006740, win 14600, length 123:36:39.321091 IP 172.16.3.14.6071 > 172.16.10.40.12345: Flags [P.], seq 2364912157:2364912158, ack 3634006740, win 14600, length 123:36:52.185135 IP 172.16.3.14.6071 > 172.16.10.40.12345: Flags [P.], seq 2364912157:2364912158, ack 3634006740, win 14600, length 123:37:17.913091 IP 172.16.3.14.6071 > 172.16.10.40.12345: Flags [P.], seq 2364912157:2364912158, ack 3634006740, win 14600, length 1

从这个测试中可以发现,当三次握手时RTT超过1秒时,数据发送阶段的RTO为3秒(服务端的SYNACK发生超时也是如此)

而后正常的一次RTT后,RTO重新收敛到200ms左右

再看看timestamps的支持如何


1234567891011121314151617 server开启iptables后,client连接server,在5次超时次数内关闭iptables23:47:47.754316 IP 172.16.3.14.8603 > 172.16.10.40.12345: Flags [S], seq 479022248, win 14600, options [mss 1460,sackOK,TS val 2336007392 ecr 0,nop,wscale 7], length 023:47:48.754079 IP 172.16.3.14.8603 > 172.16.10.40.12345: Flags [S], seq 479022248, win 14600, options [mss 1460,sackOK,TS val 2336008392 ecr 0,nop,wscale 7], length 023:47:50.754088 IP 172.16.3.14.8603 > 172.16.10.40.12345: Flags [S], seq 479022248, win 14600, options [mss 1460,sackOK,TS val 2336010392 ecr 0,nop,wscale 7], length 023:47:54.754083 IP 172.16.3.14.8603 > 172.16.10.40.12345: Flags [S], seq 479022248, win 14600, options [mss 1460,sackOK,TS val 2336014392 ecr 0,nop,wscale 7], length 023:48:02.754094 IP 172.16.3.14.8603 > 172.16.10.40.12345: Flags [S], seq 479022248, win 14600, options [mss 1460,sackOK,TS val 2336022392 ecr 0,nop,wscale 7], length 023:48:02.754683 IP 172.16.10.40.12345 > 172.16.3.14.8603: Flags [S.], seq 697602971, ack 479022249, win 14480, options [mss 1460,nop,nop,TS val 4044659641 ecr 2336022392], length 023:48:02.754742 IP 172.16.3.14.8603 > 172.16.10.40.12345: Flags [.], ack 697602972, win 14600, options [nop,nop,TS val 2336022392 ecr 4044659641], length 0接着server开启iptables后,client发送数据包,在15次超时次数内关闭iptables23:48:11.944170 IP 172.16.3.14.8603 > 172.16.10.40.12345: Flags [P.], seq 479022249:479022250, ack 697602972, win 14600, options [nop,nop,TS val 2336031582 ecr 4044659641], length 123:48:12.145036 IP 172.16.3.14.8603 > 172.16.10.40.12345: Flags [P.], seq 479022249:479022250, ack 697602972, win 14600, options [nop,nop,TS val 2336031783 ecr 4044659641], length 123:48:12.547084 IP 172.16.3.14.8603 > 172.16.10.40.12345: Flags [P.], seq 479022249:479022250, ack 697602972, win 14600, options [nop,nop,TS val 2336032185 ecr 4044659641], length 123:48:13.351106 IP 172.16.3.14.8603 > 172.16.10.40.12345: Flags [P.], seq 479022249:479022250, ack 697602972, win 14600, options [nop,nop,TS val 2336032989 ecr 4044659641], length 123:48:14.959080 IP 172.16.3.14.8603 > 172.16.10.40.12345: Flags [P.], seq 479022249:479022250, ack 697602972, win 14600, options [nop,nop,TS val 2336034597 ecr 4044659641], length 123:48:18.175092 IP 172.16.3.14.8603 > 172.16.10.40.12345: Flags [P.], seq 479022249:479022250, ack 697602972, win 14600, options [nop,nop,TS val 2336037813 ecr 4044659641], length 123:48:24.607088 IP 172.16.3.14.8603 > 172.16.10.40.12345: Flags [P.], seq 479022249:479022250, ack 697602972, win 14600, options [nop,nop,TS val 2336044245 ecr 4044659641], length 1

可以看到开启了timestamps后,FALLBACK机制重设RTO为3秒将不会起作用


linux的对RTO计算的微调

linux对RTO计算的实际实现和RFC文档相比还是有所出入的,如果只按照RFC文档去按图索骥,那么在实际的RTO估计上会误入歧途

1 根据上一段可以发现,他把RTO的最小值设为200ms(甚至在ubuntu上是50ms,而RFC建议1秒),最大值设置为120秒(RFC强制60秒以上)

2 根据我对linux代码的分析,在RTT剧烈抖动的情况下,linux的实现减轻了急剧改变的RTT干扰,使得RTO的趋势图更加平滑

这一点体现在两点微调上:

微调1

当满足以下条件时

说明R'的波动太大了,和平滑过的RTT值比,差值的比RTTVAR还大

于是

而RFC文档是

可以看到,和RFC文档相比平滑系数乘以了1/8,表示R'对RTTVAR的影响将减小,使得RTTVAR更平滑,RTO也会更平滑

微调2

当RTTVAR减少的时候,会对RTTVAR做一次平滑处理,使得RTO不会下降的太离谱出现陡峭的趋势图

Linux下超时重传时间(RTO)的实现探究

12345678910111213 [root@localhost.localdomain ~]# ping www.baidu.comPING www.a.shifen.com (180.97.33.107) 56(84) bytes of data.64 bytes from 180.97.33.107: icmp_seq=1 ttl=51 time=30.8 ms64 bytes from 180.97.33.107: icmp_seq=2 ttl=51 time=29.9 ms获得百度的IP后[root@localhost.localdomain ~]# ip route add 180.97.33.108/32 via 172.16.3.1 rto_min 20[root@localhost.localdomain ~]# nc www.baidu.com 80[root@localhost.localdomain ~]# ss -eipn '( dport =:www )'State Recv-Q Send-Q Local Address:Port Peer Address:PortESTAB 0 0 172.16.3.14:14149 180.97.33.108:80 users:(("nc",7162,3)) ino:48057454 sk:ffff88023905adc0sack cubic wscale:7,7 rto:81 rtt:27/13.5 cwnd:10 send 4.3Mbps rcv_space:14600

因为RTO_MIN

如果是内网的话,RTT非常小

1234567 [root@localhost.localdomain ~]# ip route add 172.16.3.16/32 via 172.16.3.1 rto_min 20[root@localhost.localdomain ~]# nc 172.16.3.16 22SSH-2.0-OpenSSH_5.3[root@localhost.localdomain ~]# ss -eipn '( dport =:22 )'State Recv-Q Send-Q Local Address:Port Peer Address:PortESTAB 0 0 172.16.3.14:57578 172.16.3.16:22 users:(("nc",7272,3)) ino:48059707 sk:ffff88023b7c7000sack cubic wscale:7,7 rto:21 rtt:1/0.5 ato:40 cwnd:10 send 116.8Mbps rcv_space:14600

因为RTO_MIN > 2R,所以RTO = R + RTO_MIN = 1 + 20 = 21

如果对内网的整个网络有自信的话,也可以不设置目标IP,直接对全部连接生效,如下

1 ip route change dev eth0 rto_min 20ms

总结

1 linux的超时重传实现大体上参考了RFC,但是有一部分微调:

RFC只有一个RTO初始值,为1秒。而linux的实现将三次握手阶段的包的RTO设为1秒,其余包初始时间设为0.2秒

由于RFC规定的算法不够完美,linux的实际实现在RTT剧烈抖动的情况下,减轻了急剧改变的RTT干扰,使得RTO的趋势图更加平滑

2 连接的SYN重传时间,在除非重新编译内核的情况下是无法调整的,但是push包是可以调整重传时间的

3 在比较稳定的网络中,假设设置的rto最小值为RTO_MIN

Related labels:
source:php.cn
Statement of this Website
The content of this article is voluntarily contributed by netizens, and the copyright belongs to the original author. This site does not assume corresponding legal responsibility. If you find any content suspected of plagiarism or infringement, please contact admin@php.cn
Popular Recommendations
Popular Tutorials
More>
Latest Downloads
More>
Web Effects
Website Source Code
Website Materials
Front End Template