Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 21:27:42 +0100 From: njs3@doc.ic.ac.uk (Niall Smart) To: hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: tcp states and sysctl's Message-ID: <E0ycyPn-0002lv-00@oak66.doc.ic.ac.uk>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi, I don't think a shutdown(2) sysctl is necessary. a) the BSD stack is currently compliant in this regard, if anything need's changing it's the client. b) no-one has produced any evidence to show that all these sockets in TIME_WAIT_2 are actully having a negative impact in performance on the system. Actually, I would seriously hope not, because otherwise this is a relatively easy DoS. (Though probably not as effective as a SYN flood.) If you do decide to put in a sysctl bear in mind that rsh uses shutdown(2) to close down one end of a socket so you don't want the timeout to be too short. 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?E0ycyPn-0002lv-00>