Create a Post
cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
tlloyd22
Employee
Employee
Jump to solution

First packet isn't syn

Hey everyone.  I have a new CPGW R81.10 and I have one workstation that's dropping traffic 3 to 4 times a second with the following issue:

TCP packet out of state: First packet isn't SYN

TCP Flags: RST-ACK and FIN-PUSH-ACK

Can this be ignored?  I can't say I'm seeing a perf problem.  Or, should/how can it be fixed?  Thanks all!

 

 

0 Kudos
2 Solutions

Accepted Solutions
Timothy_Hall
Champion
Champion

Generally you can ignore FIN and RST packets that are dropped out of state unless they are conclusively linked to a specific problem.  This is typically caused by the connection not being closed gracefully by one side or the other, see my post here:

https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/General-Topics/First-packet-isn-t-SYN/m-p/7027/highlight/true#M7...

 

Gateway Performance Optimization R81.20 Course
now available at maxpowerfirewalls.com

View solution in original post

Dion-ben
Explorer

Checkpoint has identified this as a problem with a timeout on half closed TCP sessions e.g. one side has send a FIN but the other has not responded with a FIN yet and has a Hotfix in sk180364 

View solution in original post

36 Replies
Timothy_Hall
Champion
Champion

Generally you can ignore FIN and RST packets that are dropped out of state unless they are conclusively linked to a specific problem.  This is typically caused by the connection not being closed gracefully by one side or the other, see my post here:

https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/General-Topics/First-packet-isn-t-SYN/m-p/7027/highlight/true#M7...

 

Gateway Performance Optimization R81.20 Course
now available at maxpowerfirewalls.com
George_Ellis
Advisor

If you do see a lot of these FIN or RSTs around home built applications, especially after they did a code release, let the dev team know.  They may not be ending a connection gracefully and might have missed a commit on their data connections.  Won't happen often, but you never know...

0 Kudos
maad-pul
Participant

Hi,

Did you find anyting related to this issue? I have also seen those packets dropped after upgrading to R81.10 TAKE30.
I haven´t seen any drops related to TCP Flags: RST-ACK and FIN-PUSH-ACK before upgrade R80.40. 

 

My problem is that I have performance issues related to flows where I see errors in logs.

I have disabled HTTPS Inspection which seems to solve the issue. 
 

 

0 Kudos
tlloyd22
Employee
Employee

After seeing Tim Hall's post and reading through, I chose to ignore the errors since I didn't see a performance issue.  Sorry I'm not more helpful...good luck!

0 Kudos
the_rock
Legend
Legend

Are you seeing any performance impact, dropped traffic? If so, then I would be concerned...if not, then I would not worry much.

0 Kudos
maad-pul
Participant

Hi,

Yes! This weekend we upgraded to lastest R81.10 GA,  I´m having users reported "slow web browsning" today, I found in logs a lot of dropped packet related to tcp/443, which haven¨t been there before. 


TCP packet out of state: First packet isn't SYN
TCP Flags: RST-ACK and FIN-PUSH-ACK

I quick fix, just to now whats goding on was to disable HTTPS Inspection for that VS. Logs dissapeard and users reported good web browsing performance after that. The Logs are from the FW-blade and not HTTPS Inspection.

0 Kudos
the_rock
Legend
Legend

You may need to debug wstlsd process for https inspection, when its enabled.

0 Kudos
CheckPointerXL
Advisor

hello, did you fix it?

0 Kudos
maad-pul
Participant

Hi 

Yes, patched an the problem was solved. According to TAC PRJ-30820 was the issue. 

0 Kudos
CheckPointerXL
Advisor

i'm happy for you.

I don't think that's my case, PRJ-30820 is on T38 and i faced the problem on T55

0 Kudos
skandshus
Advisor
Advisor

I am seeing a LOT of those too in my ubiquiti unifi controller where connection status/heartbeats then gets time out and throwing me an Alert of a device disconnecting even though it’s working fine. It’s so annoying.. never had that issue before checkpoint unfortunately 😞

0 Kudos
the_rock
Legend
Legend

I would open TAC case for it to have them verify, specially given the fact it causes traffic issues.

0 Kudos
maad-pul
Participant

Hi!

I will do that, I just need to verify Hyperthreading (SMT/HT) enabling i BIOS for the HPE-server.  I don´t know if thats setting was enabled in last update to R80.40, but support seems to be removed. 

See https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Security-Gateways/Attention-HyperThreading-SMT-support-for-Open-....

0 Kudos
Pedro_Sentinela
Contributor

hello, I'm having the same problem as you and I'm losing a lot of packages that are destroying the performance. Could you let me know if there was a solution to your problem?

0 Kudos
skandshus
Advisor
Advisor

mine isnt fixed.

 

from my experience it doesnt look like Check point have a FIX for it actually 😞

(1)
the_rock
Legend
Legend

Well, first packet isnt syn error is not something CP would have a fix for, per se, its usually routing issue, from my experience.

(2)
skandshus
Advisor
Advisor

Routing issue in what sense?

 

 

0 Kudos
Chris_Atkinson
Employee Employee
Employee

Indeed, need to ensure the symptoms are identical i.e. in no particular order:

- Asymmetric routing (both direction/sides of the flow need to traverse the firewall)

- Aggressive aging (due to resource issue or other transient event)

- App issue / TCP half-closed (sk11088 / sk137672)

- HTTPS inspection (sk118415)

CCSM R77/R80/ELITE
skandshus
Advisor
Advisor

i've had a TAC case but nothing resolved so far.

Aggresive aging or APp issue?<< what do you think here?

0 Kudos
George_Ellis
Advisor

Zombie alert - Adding to your list Chris:
- Missing keep alive by the application. (and remember Oracle must be restarted if you turn on keep alive! - that took a few months until an Oracle support engineer working for IBM said, "did you restart the instance?"  The protocol stack needs to be rebuilt to add keep alive to the virtual NIC)

- Device in the middle has short keep alive timer (load balancer had a 5 minute keep-alive).

General tip for asymmetric routing, see which interfaces are used outbound and inbound.  You may see eth1 -> dst -> eth2 (s_port is from dst port, d_port matches org src port - you can use matches such as "(s_port=52212 or s_port=443) and (d_port=52212 or d_port=443)" when you identify such a packet to isolate a single piece of traffic.

0 Kudos
Ravi_cp
Explorer

I'm facing similar kind of issue after upgrade and pushing policy on standby gateway .we are not able to access the web UI/ssh of gateway.

While further checking in log  found lot of  TCP out of order packet drop for reverse traffic,  for testing purpose added gateway in expectation, than it starting working .  Observers gateway for 2 min and found gateway hang and not responding , so again started new session of ssh but response is too slow again checked resource and found utilisation is fair enough .

So I drop the plan of upgrade and rollback the change .

Upgrade from R80.30 to R81 latest jumbo hotfix.

0 Kudos
_Val_
Admin
Admin

Are you sure you do not have an asymmetric routing situation with that GW?

0 Kudos
Ravi_cp
Explorer

After rollback it working , is upgrade change the topology and anti spoofing setting .

I used snapshot for rollback 

0 Kudos
_Val_
Admin
Admin

This does not answer my original question. It might be that some settings after the upgrade triggered the asymmetric routing. 

0 Kudos
Ravi_cp
Explorer

I need to check the routing after upgrade 

0 Kudos
the_rock
Legend
Legend

Just do ip r g 8.8.8.8 or ip r g x.x.x.x, where x.x.x.x is any IP you would usually test for routing checks. That would tell you for sure if something looks different.

Andy

0 Kudos
maad-pul
Participant

PRJ-30820 was my issue. 

Jonne_Hannon
Contributor

It appears that in my case, the connection is being expired after 15 seconds when the firewall sees the DEST-FIN.  The client (Chrome/Edge)  continues to send Keep-Alive packets for about 5 minutes, which are all dropped out of state.  The client then sends several FIN-ACK packets, which are also dropped out of state.  This is what the connection looks like before DST-FIN:

<00000000, 0a7a1550, 0000d333, ac1c2015, 00000050, 00000006; 0001c001, 40044080, 00000038, 000001cf, 00000000, 6387085d, 00000008, 13e3b1d3, d7e5c551, 00000003, ffffffff, ffffffff, ffffffff, 0000e800, 00000000, 80000000, 00000000, 00000000, ac442808, 00007f8e, 00000000, 02101801, 00000000, 00000000, 00000000, 00000000, 00000000, 00000000, 00000000, 00000000, 00000000, 00000000, 00000000, 00000000; 3603/3615>

and after the DEST-FIN

<00000000, 0a7a1550, 0000d330, ac1c2015, 00000050, 00000006; 0001e001, 40044080, 00000038, 000001cf, 00000000, 6387085d, 00000000, 13e3b1d3, d7e5c551, 00000003, ffffffff, ffffffff, ffffffff, 0000e800, 00000000, 80000000, 00000000, 00000000, b8fd9088, 00007f8e, 00000000, 06ce0001, 00000000, 00000000, 00000000, 00000000, 00000000, 00000000, 00000000, 00000000, 00000000, 00000000, 00000000, 00000000; 14/15>

After the server sends the FIN-ACK to the client, the connection is updated with this 15 second timeout.  The client (Chrome/Edge) sends the first Keep-Alive packets after 45 seconds and several more Keep-Alive packets at 45 second intervals, These Keep-Alive packets are all dropped out of state, as well as subsequent FIN-ACK packets.  I'm not sure where the 15 second timeout is coming from; the TCP end session timeout is 5 seconds.  Disabling SecureXL resolves the issue.  I have a case open, but not getting anywhere quickly unfortunately.  I'm not sure if this is impacting user experience, other than causing Chrome and Edge to use more sockets than necessary and generating lots of unnecessary logs.  It seems to be that there is an issue with SecureXL expiring half-closed connections too early and would like to get to the bottom of it

0 Kudos
skandshus
Advisor
Advisor

Nice trouble shooting right there 👍

0 Kudos

Leaderboard

Epsum factorial non deposit quid pro quo hic escorol.

Upcoming Events

    CheckMates Events