| 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
| ||
|
Date: Sun, 20 Mar 2011 13:14:14 +0100 From: Hagen Paul Pfeifer <hagen@...u.net> To: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com> Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] socket: increase default maximum listen queue length * Eric Dumazet | 2011-03-20 12:55:44 [+0100]: >I am not sure you understood what I said. > >Even if you change kernel limits, many applications still use low >limits : listen(fd, 8) Right, but there is a discrepance between system administrators and server authors: the later group will probably notice that listen(fd, 8) is not adequate (e.g. someone send a bug report). System administrators on the other hand have no obvious indicator that some goes wrong in the system. Most of then would not even notice that the backlog is overflowing. >I remember some other OS (was it HPUX or Solaris...) had a minimum >limit : Even if application said 8, an admin could impose a 256 value >for example. Not the baddest idea! It is nice that a server author can adjust that value. But between you and me: the system administrator may have more information about the network behavior (how many incoming connections/minute, RTT, memory characteristic, ...). The system administrator should be in the ability to increase the value, currently he is stucked up if the server author missed that. E.g. http://www.dovecot.org/list/dovecot-cvs/2009-September/014567.html I will spin a patch for that. Hagen -- 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