Re: Telnet Server
  By: Digital Man to deon on Sun Apr 07 2024 06:03 pm

Howdy,

 > For example, if you accidentally ran a second instead of that same TCP
 > server (or another TCP server configured for the same TCP port number), even
 > briefly, the first server would no longer have the port bound/listening. It
 > would just sit there silenty waiting for a connection that will never
 > happen. Kind of like what Apam is describing.

I guess I've never seen this scenario (on Linux anyway). I have started TCP server apps on a host, and have clashed on TCP ports often (happens more frequently that you would realise with docker), and I've never seen a server "silently waiting" because it opened the port first, and another application came along and took it.

I did some (albeit quick) reading today on TCP and SO_RESUSEADDR, and what you are describing seemed to be a known windows issue (that perhaps has been resolved?). Somebody made a reference to it anyway...

I'll keep an eye out on stuff I use, and see which apps dont use SO_RESUSEADDR by default (given I stop and restart stuff often and quickly it should be easy to identify). I understand why it helps to get around a TCP protocol issue (the old port going into TIME_WAIT when it is shut down) - and it is a pain for synchronet when it is recycled and not set.

Perhaps you could implement a startup delay/wait? - since it is quite easy to trip you up if you dont have it and its not the default.


...лоеп

---
 ю Synchronet ю AnsiTEX bringing back videotex but with ANSI