From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/77370 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Ted Zlatanov Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel,gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: Emacs hangs with concurrent TLS connections Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2011 16:24:42 -0600 Organization: =?utf-8?B?0KLQtdC+0LTQvtGAINCX0LvQsNGC0LDQvdC+0LI=?= @ Cienfuegos Message-ID: <87k4gn69cl.fsf@lifelogs.com> References: <87ipz12zy7.fsf@lifelogs.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1298672835 5149 80.91.229.12 (25 Feb 2011 22:27:15 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2011 22:27:15 +0000 (UTC) Cc: ding@gnus.org To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Feb 25 23:27:11 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Pt67y-0001gA-GC for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 25 Feb 2011 23:27:10 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:53249 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Pt67x-0002B6-P3 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 25 Feb 2011 17:27:09 -0500 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=41074 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Pt67i-0007WZ-MN for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 25 Feb 2011 17:26:57 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Pt662-0001Ho-0o for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 25 Feb 2011 17:25:14 -0500 Original-Received: from lo.gmane.org ([80.91.229.12]:40520) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Pt661-0001HC-NJ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 25 Feb 2011 17:25:09 -0500 Original-Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Pt65w-0000gY-5C for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 25 Feb 2011 23:25:04 +0100 Original-Received: from 38.98.147.130 ([38.98.147.130]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 25 Feb 2011 23:25:04 +0100 Original-Received: from tzz by 38.98.147.130 with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 25 Feb 2011 23:25:04 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Original-Lines: 67 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: 38.98.147.130 X-Face: bd.DQ~'29fIs`T_%O%C\g%6jW)yi[zuz6; d4V0`@y-~$#3P_Ng{@m+e4o<4P'#(_GJQ%TT= D}[Ep*b!\e,fBZ'j_+#"Ps?s2!4H2-Y"sx" User-Agent: Gnus/5.110014 (No Gnus v0.14) Emacs/24.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:zu3UEucjLdAWbOjwyqJCsxanmD8= X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) X-Received-From: 80.91.229.12 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:136535 gmane.emacs.gnus.general:77370 Archived-At: On Mon, 13 Dec 2010 04:36:18 +0100 Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen wrote: LMI> Ted Zlatanov writes: >> Have you looked at a verbose log with gnutls-log-level set high? LMI> Good idea. LMI> It starts off normal with all the tls chatter, and then it ends up LMI> here... LMI> gnutls.c: [9] INT: CLIENT WRITE KEY [16]: 6cecebb7aa1e56ee74f24771b39f996a LMI> gnutls.c: [9] INT: SERVER WRITE KEY [16]: 70c92720b41a6e281485e907d8a439c9 LMI> gnutls.c: [3] HSK[0x1848300]: Cipher Suite: RSA_ARCFOUR_SHA1 LMI> gnutls.c: [3] HSK[0x1848300]: Initializing internal [write] cipher sessions LMI> gnutls.c: [6] BUF[HSK]: Peeked 0 bytes of Data LMI> gnutls.c: [6] BUF[HSK]: Emptied buffer LMI> gnutls.c: [3] HSK[0x1848300]: FINISHED was send [16 bytes] LMI> gnutls.c: [6] BUF[HSK]: Peeked 0 bytes of Data LMI> gnutls.c: [6] BUF[HSK]: Emptied buffer LMI> gnutls.c: [4] REC[0x1848300]: Sending Packet[0] Handshake(22) with length: 16 LMI> gnutls.c: [7] WRITE: Will write 41 bytes to 0x8. LMI> gnutls.c: [7] WRITE: wrote 41 bytes to 0x8. Left 0 bytes. Total 41 bytes. LMI> gnutls.c: [7] 0000 - 16 03 01 00 24 50 ca 9f d8 2c d4 34 33 15 cb 33 LMI> gnutls.c: [7] 0001 - d7 8a de 9c ab 5c 72 0c 5b b2 4b 5b 74 ce d1 47 LMI> gnutls.c: [7] 0002 - 1b f9 db 44 d1 57 9d 9c 21 LMI> gnutls.c: [4] REC[0x1848300]: Sent Packet[1] Handshake(22) with length: 41 LMI> gnutls.c: [7] READ: -1 returned from 0x8, errno=11 gerrno=0 LMI> gnutls.c: [2] ASSERT: gnutls_buffers.c:322 LMI> gnutls.c: [2] ASSERT: gnutls_handshake.c:2525 LMI> gnutls.c: [7] READ: Got 5 bytes from 0x9 LMI> gnutls.c: [7] READ: read 5 bytes from 0x9 LMI> gnutls.c: [7] 0000 - 48 54 54 50 2f LMI> gnutls.c: [7] RB: Have 0 bytes into buffer. Adding 5 bytes. LMI> gnutls.c: [7] RB: Requested 5 bytes LMI> gnutls.c: [2] ASSERT: gnutls_record.c:507 LMI> I think everything up to here is normal. And then things go wonky: LMI> gnutls.c: [4] REC[0x1841540]: Expected Packet[0] Handshake(22) with length: 1 LMI> gnutls.c: [4] REC[0x1841540]: Received Packet[0] Unknown Packet(72) with length: 20527 LMI> gnutls.c: [4] REC[0x1841540]: FATAL ERROR: Received packet with length: 20527 LMI> gnutls.c: [2] ASSERT: gnutls_record.c:960 LMI> gnutls.c: [2] ASSERT: gnutls_buffers.c:1032 LMI> gnutls.c: [2] ASSERT: gnutls_handshake.c:1045 LMI> gnutls.c: [2] ASSERT: gnutls_handshake.c:2364 LMI> gnutls.c: [6] BUF[HSK]: Cleared Data from buffer LMI> gnutls.c: [2] ASSERT: gnutls_record.c:879 LMI> gnutls.c: [2] ASSERT: gnutls_buffers.c:1032 LMI> gnutls.c: [2] ASSERT: gnutls_handshake.c:1045 LMI> gnutls.c: [2] ASSERT: gnutls_handshake.c:2364 LMI> gnutls.c: [6] BUF[HSK]: Cleared Data from buffer LMI> gnutls.c: [2] ASSERT: gnutls_record.c:879 LMI> gnutls.c: [2] ASSERT: gnutls_buffers.c:1032 LMI> gnutls.c: [2] ASSERT: gnutls_handshake.c:1045 LMI> gnutls.c: [2] ASSERT: gnutls_handshake.c:2364 LMI> and here it just loops forever. LMI> Is the wrong socket being asked to handle the TLS data or something? LMI> Hm... I don't really know how to proceed to debug this, but it's 100% LMI> reproducible for me, so if you have any suggestions, I can test it out LMI> easily enough. Is this still happening? I plan to hit GnuTLS support after we've battled it out with auth-source. Ted