tasklwIP - A Lightweight TCP/IP stack - Tasks: task #7236, Check UDP LITE standard conformance

 
 

You are not allowed to post comments on this tracker with your current authentication level.

task #7236: Check UDP LITE standard conformance

Submitter:  Simon Goldschmidt <goldsimon>
Submitted:  Thu 23 Aug 2007 06:20:42 AM UTC
   
 
Category:  UDP Should Start On:  Thu 23 Aug 2007 12:00:00 AM UTC
Should be Finished on:  Thu 23 Aug 2007 12:00:00 AM UTC Priority:  3 - Low
Status:  Done Privacy:  Public
Assigned to:  goldsimon Percent Complete:  100%
Open/Closed:  Closed Planned Release:  None
Effort:  0.00

Sun 21 Oct 2007 12:50:17 PM UTC, comment #4: 

Didn't update the 'complete' percentage after fixing the RX side, but I'd consider it as done now.

Unless anyone has objections... I'm closing this.

Simon Goldschmidt <goldsimon>
Group administrator
Tue 09 Oct 2007 07:43:50 PM UTC, comment #3: 

Fixed receive also by using the same new checksum function inet_chksum_pseudo_partial().

Simon Goldschmidt <goldsimon>
Group administrator
Sun 07 Oct 2007 08:24:05 PM UTC, comment #2: 

I just fixed UDP LITE sending, thanks for the input, Frédéric!

- The checksum length was calculated wrong (udp header was missing due to a mixup of pbufs q and p ;-).

- The partial generation of the checksum made a new function necessary in inet.c: inet_chksum_pseudo_partial(), it takes an additional argument: u16_t chksum_len.

Now the question is how we can mix the two inet_chksum_pseudo* functions to reduce redundant code: can we assume chksum_len can be set to p->tot_len for the normal inet_chksum_pseudo() or could that produce errors?

Simon Goldschmidt <goldsimon>
Group administrator
Sat 25 Aug 2007 01:44:50 PM UTC, comment #1: 

(To have all background about this problem in this task, I copy/paste coments from task #6998)

mercredi 25.07.2007 à 21:49, commentaire #12 :

I attach a capture file (note that I only set IPPROTO_UDPLITE in "proto", and I don't have set any setsockopt, since, I suppose, default values should be good). Packet #259 is interesting for its error.

A link of wireshark about that :

http://wiki.wireshark.org/Lightweight_User_Datagram_Protocol

(file #13469)

mercredi 25.07.2007 à 20:51, commentaire #11 :

I would like to do some tests of this features. The first problem I see is that wireshark detect all UDP-Lite packets with a "wrong" checksum. Of course, Wireshark isn't perfect (and sometimes seems detect error checksums on TCP packets). But, since I don't have any other reference, I have a "doubt" about this first point. Does anyone do some tests on UDP-Lite?

Next point, I would like to test UDP-Lite with a service receiving packets on a Windows XP Pro. But I'm not sure that this OS is able to process such packets. It seems to only be possible with the IPv6 stack, and/or on Windows 2003 Server. Anyone can confirm (or not) this information ?

Frédéric Bernon <fbernon>
Group Member
Thu 23 Aug 2007 06:20:42 AM UTC, original submission:  

In task #6998, Frédéric seemed to have some problems with UDP LITE. I think we should re-check it (maybe with some other OSes as remote station?).

Simon Goldschmidt <goldsimon>
Group administrator

 

(Note: upload size limit is set to 16384 kB, after insertion of the required escape characters.)

No files currently attached

 

Depends on the following items: None found

Items that depend on this one: None found

 

Carbon-Copy List
  • -email is unavailable- added by kieranm (Updated the item)
  • -email is unavailable- added by fbernon (Posted a comment)
  • -email is unavailable- added by goldsimon (Submitted the item)
  •  

    There are 0 votes so far. Votes easily highlight which items people would like to see resolved in priority, independently of the priority of the item set by tracker managers.

     

    Follow 7 latest changes.

    Date Changed by Updated Field Previous Value => Replaced by
    2007-10-21 goldsimon StatusIn Progress Done
        Percent Complete60% 100%
        Assigned toNone goldsimon
        Open/ClosedOpen Closed
    2007-10-07 goldsimon StatusNone In Progress
        Percent Complete0% 60%
    2007-08-29 kieranm Priority5 - Normal 3 - Low

    Back to the top

    Powered by Savane 3.13-02a9.
    Corresponding source code