netdev - Re: TCP timewait recycle/reuse for IPv6?

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Mon, 17 Mar 2008 20:04:33 +0200
From:	Octavian Purdila <opurdila@...acom.com>
To:	Rick Jones <rick.jones2@...com>
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: TCP timewait recycle/reuse for IPv6?

On Monday 17 March 2008, Rick Jones wrote:
> Octavian Purdila wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Is there a way to prevent getting bind(in6addr_any) failures when we
> > have lots of TIMEWAIT sockets hanging around? It looks like timewait
> > reuse/recyle is not supported in the IPv6 stack.
>
> What is the definition/value of "lots" here?
>

At least 26000, maybe even more. I suspect that when I get the bind failures 
most of the ports in the ip_local_port_range pool are in TIMEWATstate. 

This happens because of the particular traffic I am using, which generates a 
few 1000s of connections per second. The connection lifetime is very short.

While running the same traffic with IPv4, the timewait recyle/reuse features 
kicks in and keeps the number of TIMEWAIT sockets to under a 1000.

Thanks,
tavi

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html