Zitat von "W.C.A. Wijngaards" <[email protected]>:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 11/11/2010 10:11 AM, [email protected] wrote:
Zitat von "W.C.A. Wijngaards" <[email protected]>:
I could implement such an option so-sndbuf; would it be easier to just
make it be equal to so-rcvbuf? (saves another config entry?)
Not sure. The receive sockets are low in number and tend to higher
latency if the machine is under load and could not process the incoming
packets fast enough. The send sockets could be much higher in number
(outgoing-range?) and should in case of UDP only fall behind if the
available bandwidth is saturated.
So i guess the send buffer per socket used should be smaller than the
receive buffers...
The so-rcvbuf is only applied to the port-53 sockets for incoming
queries. Like you say the outgoing sockets (due to port randomization)
see less traffic per socket.
This would vote for a separate parameter instead of using the same
value as for so-rcvbuf, no?
Regards
Andreas
_______________________________________________
Unbound-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://unbound.nlnetlabs.nl/mailman/listinfo/unbound-users
