Wireshark-users: Re: [Wireshark-users] A few questions
From: Lars Lars <laasunde@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2007 10:43:48 +0100
Thanks for the excellent reply. Do you have a date for the release of the next version of Wireshark? > Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2007 09:59:39 +0100 > From: sake@xxxxxxxxxx > To: wireshark-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > Subject: Re: [Wireshark-users] A few questions > > Hi Lars, > > I will answer your questions in reverse order as they are related to each > other and the answer on 3 helps to understand 2 and 1 :-) > > > #3. Viewing a tcp packet I noticed that it was stamped iwth 'TCP > > Retransmission'. Fair enough, just a lost packet being > > retrasmitted (the packet was timestamped 16:17:00 btw). Then I looked > > at the SEQ\ACK analysis 'This fram is a (suspected) > > retransmission. The RTO for this segment was 12460.784541000 seconds). > > RTO based on delta from frame 31 688. Frame 31688 was sent > > 12:49:19 - thats almost 4 hours difference in time. What does this > > mean? It can be retransmitting a packet 4 hours later? Thought this > > was strange. > > As you mentioned in your mail, the same tcp-ports are used again > after a while. The version of Wireshark that you are using does not > check for a SYN. So it sees the new session as a continuation > of an earlier session. Since the seq-nr on the syn of the new session > is lower than that of the last seen packet for "this tcp session", > it marks is as a retransmission. > > In the upcoming Wireshark release, Wireshark checks if a packet is a > SYN and if it is, it will create a new conversation in it's state > table. This solves these messages. > > > > #2. The communication between server and client uses a fixed pattern > > of send \recv with only small change in parts of the content. One > > tcp transmission (from SYN to FIN) usually consists of roughly 110 > > packets and the sequence number on client reaches seq=141 and on > > server seq=137. For some unknown reason (for me atleast) the tcp > > packets start using extremely high sequence numbers (they > > dont slow increase in size, they just make a huge jump). So suddenly > > Im getting sequence numbers like 3367739430. Can anyone > > explain why this is happening? Should I be worried about these high > > number or can I just ignore them? > > TCP sequence numbers are actually (almost) never these low values. The > first seq-nr is chosen randomly and it's a 32-bit counter. So the actual > sequence numbers on the wire are mostly high numbers. Wireshark has > the option to show relative sequence numbers. You can select that > in the TCP protocol preferences. By default it is selected I believe. > But when issue #3 occurs, there is a new randomly chosen seq-nr > to start the new conversation with. Since the current version of > Wireshark does not see this as a new session, it will still calculate > the relative sequence number against the old session. Hence the high > numbers in this case. > > > #1. When selecting a tcp packet and clicking on 'follow tcp stream' > > what constitute a tcp stream? It appears to me that if source and > > destination port match = tcp stream. This comes out a bit odd on > > my system since the server port changes port between each transmission > > hence it at some point in time the server will re-use a > > source\destination port. So When I do 'follow tcp stream' it appears > > Im getting several stream with quite different timestamps on them. > > Have I understood the functionality of 'follow tcp stream', am I > > using it correctly? > > Yes, the current implementation of "Follow TCP stream" will filter on > both ip-addresses and tcp-ports. When a new session uses the same > addresses and ports, it will match the filter and also these packets will > be shown in packet-list. > > I hope this explains to you what you are seeing :-) > > Cheers, > Sake > _______________________________________________ > Wireshark-users mailing list > Wireshark-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > http://www.wireshark.org/mailman/listinfo/wireshark-users Søk fra enhver webside med kraftig beskyttelse. Få Windows Live Toolbar GRATIS i dag! Hold kontakten med venner og familie med Messenger |
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: [Wireshark-users] A few questions
- From: Sake Blok
- Re: [Wireshark-users] A few questions
- References:
- [Wireshark-users] A few questions
- From: Lars Lars
- Re: [Wireshark-users] A few questions
- From: Sake Blok
- [Wireshark-users] A few questions
- Prev by Date: Re: [Wireshark-users] A few questions
- Next by Date: Re: [Wireshark-users] A few questions
- Previous by thread: Re: [Wireshark-users] A few questions
- Next by thread: Re: [Wireshark-users] A few questions
- Index(es):