Maarten Bekers wrote:
hi,
Maarten, How do you propose to handle Timeout processing with your patch?
Please correct me if i'm wrong, but to my understanding, the TransmitFile() call is run in overlapped mode, hence transmitfile() returns almost immediatly and only blocks on the WaitForSingleObject() call. Handling timeouts, doesnt work any differently with this than before except that the blocking in WaitForsingleObject() might take longer than before.
That's precisely the problem. We need a timeout on WaitForSingleObject to prevent someone from mounting a DoS attack on the server with a client that requests a file then does not do a receive. The blocksize needs to be no larger than what the slowest client can receive in 1 timeout period. I agree that 64KB is probably way too conservative (ie, assumes unreasonably slow clients) but doubling the blocksize does not really eliminate the problem you are describing. I expect there are other techniques to do timeouts (with registry settings perhaps?).
Bill
