| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <4D5EB2AE.5050703@genband.com> Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2011 11:55:58 -0600 From: Chris Friesen <chris.friesen@...band.com> To: netdev@...r.kernel.org Subject: how to listen() on single IP address but very many ports? I have an application team that needs to listen() for tcp connections on many ports (and by many I mean pretty much all 64K ports). However, the connections are short-lived, and the number of active connections at any given time is small. Apparently when they tried this before on an older kernel the performance of the naive "open 60K sockets and call listen()" solution was not acceptable, so they used NAT with port mapping to direct all the incoming packets to a single real port. However, they now want to add support for IPv6 and this solution won't work. What's the recommended method for efficiently listening on this many ports? Should I be able to efficiently listen() on that many sockets using epoll or similar? If there isn't a way to do this, is there an equivalent IPv6 workaround? One possible solution that came up was to implement a PORT_ANY which would match any incoming request that didn't already have an explicit listener. Even better would be a way to bind a single listening socket to a range of ports. Has anyone ever considered something like this? Chris -- Chris Friesen Software Developer GENBAND chris.friesen@...band.com www.genband.com -- 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
Powered by blists - more mailing lists