Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 15 Nov 2008 16:52:28 +0100 | From | Willy Tarreau <> | Subject | Re: tcp_tw_recycle broken? |
| |
On Sat, Nov 15, 2008 at 10:47:10AM -0500, Karl Pickett wrote: > On Sat, Nov 15, 2008 at 8:09 AM, Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org> wrote: > > "Karl Pickett" <karl.pickett@gmail.com> writes: > >> > >> May I just confirm.. is tcp_tw_reuse NOT dependent on receiving timestamps? > > > > The big problem is that both are incompatible with NAT. So if you > > ever talk to any NATed clients don't use it. > > > > -Andi > > > > -- > > ak@linux.intel.com > > > > > Hmph. Running the test again - after getting a little sleep - > timestamps do indeed determine if tw_reuse/recyle work. I must not > have let all the tw buckets expire before changing my timestamp > settings last night. > > Since > A. I don't want to rely on arbitrary web servers having timestamps > B. People say it breaks NAT for clients, and the settings are global only, > > I will just set TCP_TIMEWAIT_LEN to 10 seconds and call it a day.
you should increase it a bit. I've encountered occasional issues at 15s, but none at 20s.
> Sure would be nice if it was a tunable, so only the most heavily > loaded customers could set it...
Indeed. other OSes (eg Solaris) ship with standard values and let us adjust them.
Willy
| |