Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2003 13:09:08 +0200 From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?John_B=E4ckstrand?= <sandos@home.se> To: <greg.panula@dolaninformation.com> Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Mbuf Clusters on 4.8 Message-ID: <006501c33bd3$5d2749e0$0000fea9@sandos> References: <000b01c33b7e$bc37fdd0$0000fea9@sandos> <3EFAAC3C.8911F322@dolaninformation.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > >From this it sounds as it is a problem that should be > > fixed, but it > > obviously isnt in 4.8. Is this behaviour now considered > > acceptable? And if > > so, doesnt this make FreeBSD extremely easy to kill > > using a simple > > DOS-attack? Is this "fixed" in any way on 5.1? > > Yup, that is what DoS attack is... exhaustion of one or more resources > of the victim. > > P2P software is an easy way to exhaust mbuf buffers on a box. P2P > software(e.g. edonkey) can be a useful network stress tool; opens lots > of connections and pushes a lot of data. My experience with mbuf > exhaustion on a 4-stable boxes has been the box basically loses network > connectivty until it can recover some buffers. The box is still > responsive from the console and killing the offending application from > the console will free up the mbufs and restore network connectivity. Ah, unfortunately my box doesnt respond even to keyboard events (caps lock etc). The behaviour you describe I find totally acceptable on the other hand. And the software Im writing happens to be p2p-related, but its not a edonkey server. :) --- John Bäckstrand
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?006501c33bd3$5d2749e0$0000fea9>