Subject: Re: ipv6 reverse name server vs. ftp
To: Steven M. Bellovin <email@example.com>
From: Luke Mewburn <lukem@NetBSD.org>
Date: 07/01/2005 11:41:23
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
On Tue, Jun 28, 2005 at 08:36:43PM -0400, Steven M. Bellovin wrote:
| In message <20050629002158.GX5900@mewburn.net>, Luke Mewburn writes:
| >I suspect that the 60s timeout in dataconn() for active mode accept()
| >is what's timing out for you _if_ you're running a recent ftp
| >client with active mode ftp. You could try cranking the timeout
| > ftp -q 120 ...
| >and seeing if that helps.
| It didn't help. Rereading my post, I see I forgot an important detail:=
| I'm seeing the=20
| 421 Service not available, remote server timed out. Connection closed
| message. That comes when trying to read the 220 line.
| >If so, I may have to consider cranking that hard-coded 60s
| >timeout in accept() (possibly to 120s, to take into account
| >the default ~ 75s timeout that many DNS resolvers have).
| It's not the accept(); the connection is in ESTABLISHED state.
Ok, so it's the use of "alarmtimer(60)" in getreply(); that behaviour
has been there for a few years.
I think I need to modify that use of alarmtimer so that it uses
the -q quit_time value.
That leaves the issue of what timeout to use for the timeout in
dataconn() and getreply() if no quit_time is given?
Possibly revert back to very old ftp behaviour of "wait forever"...
(I may consider an environment various to set quit_time as well.)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (NetBSD)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----