Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2017 17:04:52 -0800 From: =?UTF-8?Q?Ermal_Lu=C3=A7i?= <eri@freebsd.org> To: Slawa Olhovchenkov <slw@zxy.spb.ru> Cc: Julian Elischer <julian@freebsd.org>, "freebsd-net@freebsd.org" <freebsd-net@freebsd.org>, Randall Stewart <rrs@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: all network people please review this proposal: because someone is going to commit it soon. D5017 Message-ID: <CAPBZQG3G-YanvDpB0wvhuTGKAUmgjwKkD70vS5QUfwKanFVAtg@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20170120151511.GR78888@zxy.spb.ru> References: <678042cf-9d5f-2f39-6689-30eadf4214a7@freebsd.org> <20170120151511.GR78888@zxy.spb.ru>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, Jan 20, 2017 at 7:15 AM, Slawa Olhovchenkov <slw@zxy.spb.ru> wrote: > On Fri, Jan 20, 2017 at 11:00:18PM +0800, Julian Elischer wrote: > > > Unless eri gets to it first I will. > > > > see https://reviews.freebsd.org/D5017 > > > > If you have a server, you can put an arbitrary number of clients on > > the same port number because they all have different addresses. > > > > However in the case of a client accessing multiple servers we are > > limited to 65535 sessions because we strictly don't allow the same > > port to be used more than once. This is silly because TCP is a > > symmetrical protocol and of it works for the server it should work for > > the client. > > > > So this patch changes the allocation of ports to allow the client to > > use a port that has been used before as long as the previous port user > > is not talking to the same host/port. This removes the limitation of a > > freebsd machine being only capable of contacting 65000 hosts in a > > single port shutdown timeout period. With modern machines capable of > > initiating MILLIONS of sessions per second, having a limitation of > > 65000 per 2 minutes is a bit silly. > > > > > > Please read the patch if you suspect this will have a bad effect of > > any sort. Once the session is started there is no record as to who > > started it so any issues would have to be in the startup phase. > > Good. > Can you use also destination port and source IP in same way as > destination address? > This is an improvement over the proposal. Let the existing proposal go in than can improve it even more. -- Ermal
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAPBZQG3G-YanvDpB0wvhuTGKAUmgjwKkD70vS5QUfwKanFVAtg>