From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933076AbWF2Wtd (ORCPT ); Thu, 29 Jun 2006 18:49:33 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S933075AbWF2Wtc (ORCPT ); Thu, 29 Jun 2006 18:49:32 -0400 Received: from nessie.weebeastie.net ([220.233.7.36]:40970 "EHLO bunyip.lochness.weebeastie.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S933072AbWF2Wtb (ORCPT ); Thu, 29 Jun 2006 18:49:31 -0400 Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2006 08:50:39 +1000 From: CaT To: Bill Davidsen Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: 2.6.17.1: fails to fully get webpage Message-ID: <20060629225039.GO2149@zip.com.au> References: <20060629015915.GH2149@zip.com.au> <20060628.194627.74748190.davem@davemloft.net> <20060629030923.GI2149@zip.com.au> <20060628.204709.41634813.davem@davemloft.net> <20060629041827.GJ2149@zip.com.au> <44A3E898.1020202@tmr.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <44A3E898.1020202@tmr.com> Organisation: Furball Inc. User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Jun 29, 2006 at 10:50:00AM -0400, Bill Davidsen wrote: > >Basically the mostlikely end-result is I don't know what there is a > >problem and my customer doesn't know that there is a problem but they're > >just not getting as many hits to their site that they otherwise would. > > > >Ofcourse, this all depends if such a situation is possible. If it is > >possible would it affect dns and mail in a similar manner too? > > > I'm glad David Miller clarified this, because I was about to send a > "don't do that" followup ;-) :) I don't know how I got the wrong config option to modify but there you go. :) > But your example is misleading, or at least doesn't reflect customers I > know. While a few clients with broken network connections may be > unhappy, disabling scaling will make your web server really, really, > slow, and that will make everyone unhappy. Particularly if the web > content is flash or 2MB jpegs, or other ill-chosen stuff. You don't want > people to think you are running at dial-up speeds. Which would be why I wont move from 2.6.16.x for my servers unless I really, really, really have to. I don't know how many broken sites are out there and I cannot tell. Another datapoint to this is that I've had this my netcat web test running since 8:42pm yesterday. It's 8:37am now. It hasn't progressed in any way. It hasn't quit. It hasn't timed out. It just sits there, hung. This leads me to consider the possibility of a DOS, either intentional or accidental (think about 2.6.17.x running on a mail server and someone mails/spams from a broken place). -- "To the extent that we overreact, we proffer the terrorists the greatest tribute." - High Court Judge Michael Kirby