Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 1 Jun 2004 19:07:35 -0500 (CDT)
From:      Mike Silbersack <silby@silby.com>
To:        Andre Oppermann <andre@freebsd.org>
Cc:        freebsd-net@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: net.inet.ip.portrange.randomized=1 hurts
Message-ID:  <20040601190334.P83544@odysseus.silby.com>
In-Reply-To: <40BCEACA.8918878F@freebsd.org>
References:  <20040601120238.B44353@atlantis.atlantis.dp.ua> <20040601120412.B63021@odysseus.silby.com> <40BCEACA.8918878F@freebsd.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

On Tue, 1 Jun 2004, Andre Oppermann wrote:

> A port should not be reused this fast.  Maybe the randomness isn't
> so random after all and choses the same port over again and again?

We use arc4random, so I don't think that's likely, but it is possible.

> > A simpler solution might be to use passive mode.  I think that you can set
> > that somewhere in the install options.
>
> Unless he does a full cycle of all available ports there shouldn't be
> a collision.
>
> --
> Andre

Since we're using random allocation, faster reuses are certainly possible.

Something fishy must be going on here, because sysinstall doesn't make too
many ftp connections, does it?  Port recycling issues should only be
showing up in applications which make thousands of connections per minute.

Mike "Silby" Silbersack



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040601190334.P83544>