Network Working Group
Request for Comments: #202
NIC #7155
Categories: D
References: Document #2
Obsoletes: None
We have noticed a possible deadlock situation which may arise using the
Initial Connection Protocol (ICP) specified in Document #2 (NIC #7101 in
the Current Network Protocols Notebook NIC #7104).
If on both sides one RFC is issued and a "wait for match" is required
before the second RFC is issued, it is possible that the first RFC's
will not match.
their send or both sides open their receive sockets first.
Briefly the ICP is:
<where the original uses a script lowercase letter with a single digit
subscript we use the lower case letter followed by {digit} so that
script-m-subscript-2 is printed m{2}>
Server 
------
S1: Listen on socket L.
S2: Wait for a match.
S3: STR(L, U, s{1})
S4: Wait for allocation.
S5: Send data S in s{1} bit 

Steve Wolfe

UCLA-CCN

Jon Postel

UCLA-NMC

26 July 1971

In particular a deadlock will occur if both sides open

User

----

U1:  RTS(U, L, l{1})

U2:  Wait for match.

U3:  All(l{1}, m{1}, b{1})

U4:  Receive data S in s{1}




bytes as allowed by                   bit bytes.


allocation m{1}, b{1}.





S6:  CLS(L, U)                        U5:  CLS(U, L)




S7:  RTS(S, U+3, l{2})                U6:  STR(U+3, S, s{2})




S8:  STR(S+1, U+2, s{3})              U7:  RTS(U+2, S+1, l{3})



"The labels here imply no ordering except that ordering required by the

Host-Host Protocol.  Note that steps S7 and S8 can be reversed as can U6


and U7.  Also, notice that at any time after S2 the server could


initiate steps S7 and S8 in parallel with steps S3 through S6, and that


at any time after U4 the user could initiate steps U6 and U7 in parallel


with step U5."



                                                                [Page 1]



We recommend that the server perform steps 7 and 8 before waiting for


the user to perform step 6 or 7.  It is also suggested that the user


issue the RFC's in steps 6 and 7 without waiting for the server.  (If


the user is only Listening then both Listens should be issued without


waiting for the server.)  If for some reason a host must delay between


issuing RFC's it must issue the RFC's involving sockets S and U+3 first.



       [ This RFC was put into machine readable form for entry ]
         [ into the online RFC archives by Robert Barnes 6/97 ]


                                                                [Page 2]