netdev.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Michael T Kerrisk" <mtk-lists@gmx.net>
To: netdev@oss.sgi.com
Subject: SO_REUSEADDR behavior different from BSD
Date: Wed, 4 Aug 2004 16:25:27 +0200 (MEST)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <16224.1091629527@www2.gmx.net> (raw)

Gidday,

In the classical BSD sockets implementation, the 
SO_REUSEADDR socket option serves two purposes:

(a) to permit a socket to be bound to a port that currently 
    has a bound endpoint in the TIME_WAIT state, and

(b) to allow a terminated server to be restarted (and once
    again be bound to it's well-known port), even if there 
    is a child of the previous server still serving a 
    connection.

On Linux SO_REUSEADDR does serve this purpose.  However, 
other second scenario is mot permitted by SO_REUSEADDR.  
To make it clear what I mean, I’ll detail the scenario.  
Suppose we have the following:

                      Server (host Y)
                    
                      Create listening socket -- fd 4
                      bind() to INADDR_ANY:9999
                      listen()
                      accept()

Client (host X)

Create socket
connect() to Y:9999   <accept unblocks, fd 5 returned>

                      server forks --------+
                                            \ <child>
                      server terminates      closes fd 4
                                             <keeps running, with
                                             fd 5 holding the
                                             connection to client>

At this point, netstat on host Y shows the tuple 

    [local=Y-IP-addr:9999, remote=X-IP-addr:ephem-port] ESTABLISHED

                      New Server started
                      Create listening socket -- fd 4
                      set SO_REUSEADDR to 1 for fd 4

                      bind() fd 4 to port INADDR_ANY:9999
                      WHAT HAPPENS?

On FreeBSD, the bind() succeeds, and then using "netstat –an" 
on host Y shows:

    [local=Y-IP-addr:9999, remote=X-IP-addr:ephem-port] ESTABLISHED
and
    [local=*:9999, remote=*.*] CLOSED

But on Linux (2.6), the bind() fails with EADDRINUSE.

Why does Linux behave differently in this scenario?

Cheers,

Michael

-- 
Michael Kerrisk
mtk-lists@gmx.net

NEU: WLAN-Router für 0,- EUR* - auch für DSL-Wechsler!
GMX DSL = supergünstig & kabellos http://www.gmx.net/de/go/dsl

             reply	other threads:[~2004-08-04 14:25 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2004-08-04 14:25 Michael T Kerrisk [this message]
2004-08-05 14:14 ` SO_REUSEADDR behavior different from BSD bert hubert
2004-08-05 16:36   ` Michael T Kerrisk
2004-08-05 18:20     ` David Stevens
2004-08-05 18:34     ` YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / 吉藤英明
2004-08-08  2:25       ` Fernando Gont
2004-08-09 13:29         ` Michael T Kerrisk
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2004-08-05 22:25 Michael T Kerrisk

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=16224.1091629527@www2.gmx.net \
    --to=mtk-lists@gmx.net \
    --cc=netdev@oss.sgi.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).