Re: A call to revise sockets behaviour
From: Stephen Hemminger
Date: Mon Jul 29 2013 - 11:35:29 EST
On Mon, 29 Jul 2013 15:10:34 +0000 (UTC)
"Artem S. Tashkinov" <t.artem@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Currently the Linux kernel disallows to start listening on a TCP/UDP socket if
> there are open connections against the port, regardless connections status. So even
> if _all_ you have is some stale (i.e. no longer active connections pending destruction)
> the kernel will not allow to reuse this socket.
> Stephen Hemminger argues that this behaviour is expected even though it's 100%
> counter productive, it defies common sense and I cannot think of any security implications
> should this feature be allowed.
> Besides, when discussing this bug on Wine's bugzilla I have shown that this behavior not
> only affect Windows applications running under Wine, but also native POSIX applications.
> If nothing else is listening to incoming connections how can _old_ _stale_ connections
> prevent an application from listening on the port? Windows has no qualms about allowing
> that, why the Linux kernel works differently?
> I want to hear how the current apparently _broken_ behaviour, "The current socket API
> behavior is unlikely to be changed because so many applications expect it", can be expected.
> Also I'd like to know which applications depend on this "feature".
> Imagine a situation,
> You have an apache server serving connections on port 80. For some reasons a crash in
> one of its modules causes the daemon crash but during the crash Apache had some open
> connections on this port.
> According to Stephen Hemminger I cannot relaunch Apache until the kernel waits arbitrary
> time in order to clean stale connections for its networking pool.
> I fail to see how this behaviour can be "expected".
> More on it here:
I understand your problem, people have been having to deal with it for 30 years.
The attitude in your response makes it seem like you just discovered fire,
read a book like Steven's network programming if you need more info.
If you don't use SO_REUSEADDR then yes application has to wait for time wait
If you do enable SO_REUSEADDR then it is possible to bind to a port with existing
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/