netdev.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Bill Fink <billfink@mindspring.com>
To: Eric Dumazet <dada1@cosmosbay.com>
Cc: Octavian Purdila <opurdila@ixiacom.com>, netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: ports beeing reused too fast
Date: Sat, 9 May 2009 15:31:35 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090509153135.04874f72.billfink@mindspring.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4A059E75.7060008@cosmosbay.com>

On Sat, 09 May 2009, Eric Dumazet wrote:

> Octavian Purdila a écrit :
> > On Saturday 09 May 2009 09:58:25 Eric Dumazet wrote:
> > 
> >>> I've looked over the  code and it looks right, so maybe net_random() is
> >>> not random enough? Or maybe there are side effects because of the %
> >>> port_range?
> >> Random is random :)
> >> Probability a port can be reused pretty fast is not nul.
> >>
> > 
> > Thinking again about it... you are right :)
> > 
> >> So yes, behavior you discovered is expected, when we switched port
> >> selection from a sequential one (not very secure btw) to a random one.
> >>
> >> Any strong reason why a firewall would drop a SYN because ports were used
> >> in a previous session ?
> > 
> > We don't know why the firewall (Cisco FWSM) is dropping the packets, may be a 
> > bug, limitation or miss-configuration. We are trying to track this down with 
> > the firewall vendor.
> 
> Normally, the client machine should not reuse a port during the TIME_WAIT duration
> (TCP_TIMEWAIT_LEN being 60 seconds on linux). Port selection being random or sequential,
> it should avoid all ports recently used.
> 
> Maybe this firewall has a longer TIME_WAIT enforcement (something like 2 minutes)

But he had 19 ports being reused after only 1000 connect()s, which
with his stated ~360 (I'm assuming per second) connection rate,
would only take about 3 seconds.

						-Bill

  parent reply	other threads:[~2009-05-09 19:31 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-05-08 20:11 ports beeing reused too fast Octavian Purdila
2009-05-09  6:58 ` Eric Dumazet
2009-05-09 13:11   ` Octavian Purdila
2009-05-09 15:17     ` Eric Dumazet
2009-05-09 16:16       ` Eric Dumazet
2009-05-09 19:31       ` Bill Fink [this message]
2009-05-09 19:41         ` Octavian Purdila
2009-05-09 22:45         ` Stephen Hemminger
2009-05-12 12:32           ` Octavian Purdila
2009-05-12 15:11             ` Stephen Hemminger
2009-05-12 15:52               ` Octavian Purdila
2009-05-14 20:29                 ` Stephen Hemminger

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=20090509153135.04874f72.billfink@mindspring.com \
    --to=billfink@mindspring.com \
    --cc=dada1@cosmosbay.com \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=opurdila@ixiacom.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).