Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 24 May 1998 12:23:38 +0100
From:      njs3@doc.ic.ac.uk (Niall Smart)
To:        Terry Lambert <tlambert@primenet.com>, njs3@doc.ic.ac.uk (Niall Smart)
Cc:        jas@flyingfox.com, mark@vmunix.com, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG, isp@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: TIME_WAIT/FIN_WAIT_2...
Message-ID:  <E0ydYsN-00032b-00@oak63.doc.ic.ac.uk>
In-Reply-To: Terry Lambert <tlambert@primenet.com> "Re: TIME_WAIT/FIN_WAIT_2..." (May 23,  8:38pm)

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On May 23,  8:38pm, Terry Lambert wrote:
} Subject: Re: TIME_WAIT/FIN_WAIT_2...

> > Can I suggest that if you receive a response after step C, which you call
> > the CLOSE-WAIT response, then the TCP stack should remain in FIN-WAIT-2
> > with an infinite timeout, because the response indicates that the remote
> > TCP stack not broken and moreover that the remote client is not finished
> > sending yet.  (i.e. the 11 minute timeout you mention later would not
> > be used)
> 
> You can't do this.  You must constantly ask the client "Are you done
> yet?  Are you done yet?" because you have no other method of
> distinguishing a broken client from a non-broken client.
> 
> I understand why you would want to suggest this: it narrows the
> non-compliance window considerably.

Actually, I just hadn't thought about it enough, but I prefer your
reason, lets stick with it.  ;)

> > I think that this is a bug Microsoft would be eager to fix, after all,
> > if it affects FreeBSD web servers it also affects NT web servers, as
> > well as NT file servers, Exchange servers etc etc.
> 
> 
> I think you are wrong.  Microsoft implements the "fix" I have stated,
> and is not affected by the problem.

Ah, I didn't realise they were using this "fix".

> The "problem" would be that Microsoft clients cause UNIX servers
> to behave badly, but NT servers are unaffected.

> I would think that this would be a problem Microsoft would be eager
> to exacerbate in order to make UNIX servers look less viable than
> NT servers.

Do you really think they are that slimy?  I know they pretend they use
hungarian notation to encourage other companies to follow that convention
resulting in a 10% drop in their programmer productivity, but thats just
X-files stuff.  ;)


Niall.

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?E0ydYsN-00032b-00>