From: "Adam T. Bowen" <adamb@agitate.org.uk>
To: query <query.cdac@gmail.com>
Cc: linux-admin@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Preventing SSH timeouts . Some clarification needed
Date: Wed, 09 Jun 2010 09:15:39 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4C0F4DAB.1080205@agitate.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTinTlXuiXi_tXzBato6R4ibX8Rs3lo9XC83xo8Ci@mail.gmail.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 4453 bytes --]
Hi,
Another setting to try, on the client side, is the ServerAliveInterval.
This sets a keep alive packet to be sent within the SSH protocol, as
opposed to TCPKeepAlive which is within the underlying TCP connection. I
have had the misfortune to be behind firewalls that have harvested
"dead" connections far too quickly, in my opinion, and this setting
worked for me where TCPKeepAlive didn't. Worth a try.
Cheers,
Adam
On 09/06/10 07:44, query wrote:
> Guys , since we are clear now that we are not behind NAT , so we can
> forget now about reducing the keep-alive time
> (/proc/sys/net/ipv4/tcp_keepalive_time) to a value less than the NAT
> timeout. But anyways , I learn something new :) .
> The most likely reason which Michael also agreed can be the high load
> on both the system .
>
> So, do you suggest now to enable to enable the ClientAliveInterval
> option . Also , since ClientAliveCountMax is enabled by default with a
> value of 3 ,
> so probably I will keep the value of ClientAliveInterval less than 300
> secs . I will probably keep it at 60 secs. So , the connection will
> dropout after 180 secs if there is no response .
>
> Also , somewhat strange , TCPKeepAlive option is disabled in our
> sshd_config file , not sure why . So , If ClientAliveInterval is
> enabled , can we can leave TCPKeepAlive disabled . Is our purpose
> will serve ?
>
>
> Thanks
> Zaman
>
> On Tue, Jun 8, 2010 at 9:49 PM, Glynn Clements <glynn@gclements.plus.com> wrote:
>>
>> query wrote:
>>
>>>> I can't see how this can be caused by load. If you haven't yet enabled
>>>> ClientAliveInterval, then the connection isn't being closed by sshd
>>>> but by the kernel, due to TCP keep-alives not being acknowledged.
>>>
>>> okay...that may be the cause . The client host was also busy because
>>> of which TCP keep-alive were not acknowledged.
>>
>> Load won't have any effect upon TCP keep-alives, as it's the kernel
>> which acknowledges keep-alive packets, not the user process.
>>
>> Keep-alive allows you to detect that a host is unreachable (e.g.
>> network failure, system crash, power failure, etc). It doesn't tell
>> you anything about an individual process.
>>
>>>> As Michal suggests, the most likely reason for this is a NAT timeout.
>>>> If you're using NAT, you probably want to set the keep-alive time
>>>> (/proc/sys/net/ipv4/tcp_keepalive_time) to a value less than the NAT
>>>> timeout. Even then, that will only work for programs which enable
>>>> keep-alive (ssh and sshd both do by default; this is controlled by the
>>>> TCPKeepAlive option).
>>>
>>> How to determine the value of NAT timeout . Is it at the host level or
>>> the device where NATing is implemented .
>>
>> The device which performs NAT.
>>
>>> I was able to find the keepalive timeout value at the host .
>>>
>>> ====
>>> $ sudo sysctl -a | grep -i keepalive
>>> net.ipv4.tcp_keepalive_time = 7200
>>> net.ipv4.tcp_keepalive_probes = 9
>>> net.ipv4.tcp_keepalive_intvl = 75
>>> =====
>>>
>>> Most likely I am not behind NAT , I will confirm it tomorrow . If that
>>> is the case , then which should I consider to increase the timeout
>>> value.
>>> The kernel timeout value or implement either TCPKeepAlive option or
>>> the ClientAliveInterval interval . TCPKeepAlive option is somehow
>>> disabled in the sshd config file . Please clarify regarding this.
>>
>> TCPKeepAlive is enabled by default. But even if it's enabled, the
>> 2-hour wait before any keep-alives are sent typically won't be enough
>> to prevent NAT entries from expiring.
>>
>> Even the 5-minute interval between SSH keep-alives may be longer than
>> the NAT expiry time. Low-end router/modem devices with built-in NAT
>> seem base their default configuration on the assumption that you're
>> using HTTP from Win95 boxes, where a connection being idle for more
>> than 30 seconds usually means that the Win95 box has crashed.
>>
>> Another possibility is a really cheap ISP which uses (a heavily
>> oversubscribed pool of) dynamic IP addresses, which expire whenever
>> the connection is idle for more than a minute.
>>
>> --
>> Glynn Clements <glynn@gclements.plus.com>
>>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-admin" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
[-- Attachment #2: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature --]
[-- Type: application/pkcs7-signature, Size: 6452 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-06-09 8:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-06-08 9:36 Preventing SSH timeouts . Some clarification needed query
2010-06-08 9:48 ` Michal Nazarewicz
[not found] ` <AANLkTimTjSOmbj_ac4iiUMaHRuvp1-ljW-FUGAQbb1qt@mail.gmail.com>
[not found] ` <87k4q9g31y.fsf@erwin.mina86.com>
2010-06-08 15:10 ` query
2010-06-08 19:48 ` Michal Nazarewicz
2010-06-09 5:33 ` query
2010-06-08 10:39 ` Glynn Clements
2010-06-08 15:10 ` query
2010-06-08 16:19 ` Glynn Clements
2010-06-09 6:44 ` query
2010-06-09 8:15 ` Adam T. Bowen [this message]
2010-06-09 10:14 ` Glynn Clements
[not found] ` <AANLkTimDS_IalexVnOKtOuKN8fz13rFumHV8TrjEGtph@mail.gmail.com>
[not found] ` <19471.47290.566464.539451@cerise.gclements.plus.com>
2010-06-10 6:02 ` query
2010-06-10 13:03 ` Glynn Clements
2010-06-10 16:35 ` query
2010-06-10 23:52 ` Glynn Clements
2010-06-11 7:22 ` query
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4C0F4DAB.1080205@agitate.org.uk \
--to=adamb@agitate.org.uk \
--cc=linux-admin@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=query.cdac@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).