On Thu, Dec 02, 2010 at 08:58:20AM +0100, Tommie Gannert wrote:
> William Ahern wrote:
> >> Regarding closing UDP sockets. You can't rebind a socket (if I understand
> >> the man page correctly), so if you want to randomize ports, you'll have
> >> to close/recreate it. And from recent year's inject
William Ahern wrote:
>> Regarding closing UDP sockets. You can't rebind a socket (if I understand
>> the man page correctly), so if you want to randomize ports, you'll have
>> to close/recreate it. And from recent year's injection attacks, I think you
>> do want to randomize ports.
>>
>
> No,
On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 09:46:21AM +0100, Tommie Gannert wrote:
> Ben Greear wrote:
> > On 11/09/2010 07:43 AM, Brian Yoder wrote:
> >> One thing I did notice was that when a timeout is detected, the UDP
> >> socket should not be closed. UDP is connection-less and oblivious to
> >> whatever issues
Ben Greear wrote:
> On 11/09/2010 07:43 AM, Brian Yoder wrote:
>> One thing I did notice was that when a timeout is detected, the UDP
>> socket should not be closed. UDP is connection-less and oblivious to
>> whatever issues the server has. But if the UDP socket is closed and then
>> re-opened (whi
On 11/09/2010 07:43 AM, Brian Yoder wrote:
I'm using C-ares against one server with UDP enabled. All goes
well--very very well. Millions and millions of times in a row. But it
fails when the first timeout is detected. From then on, all subsequent
queries result in timeout failures until the appli
I'm using C-ares against one server with UDP enabled. All goes well--very
very well. Millions and millions of times in a row. But it fails when the
first timeout is detected. From then on, all subsequent queries result in
timeout failures until the application linked to C-ares is stopped and
restar
