Am 13.02.2003 23:23:15, schrieb "Dave Hooper" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>Someone was talking about this earlier, I wasn't involved in that discussion >because I felt I had nothing to add but a netstat performed earlier showed >this (edited for conciseness): This time I used TCPview, it shows the process which created the connection or listener: http://www.sysinternals.com/ntw2k/source/tcpview.shtml [snip: your netstat output] > TCP b-a-d-sector:4111 b-a-d-sector:8481 TIME_WAIT > TCP b-a-d-sector:4116 b-a-d-sector:8481 ESTABLISHED > TCP b-a-d-sector:8481 b-a-d-sector:0 LISTENING > TCP b-a-d-sector:8481 b-a-d-sector:4116 ESTABLISHED You asked about this connections: Were you using a Freenet client program over FCP? If yes then everything is ok, 8481 is one endpoint of the TCP- connection and 4116 is the other end. Both are on localhost, so this connection is listed twice. [snip: your node's connection via FNP] > >After finishing retrieving, some time (thirty minutes?) later ...: >[why did it take so long for connection to some of the node refs to be torn >down?] There's a timeout on FNP connections. (10 min? look in the configfile) To disable hundreds of TCP establishing and closing events the nodes hold a connection for some time. > Proto Local Address Foreign Address State > TCP b-a-d-sector:8888 b-a-d-sector:0 LISTENING > TCP b-a-d-sector:8891 b-a-d-sector:0 LISTENING > TCP b-a-d-sector:***** b-a-d-sector:0 LISTENING > TCP b-a-d-sector:8481 b-a-d-sector:0 LISTENING > > >Is this expected? Could anyone quickly run me through the phases involved >here and the reasoning for, e.g. connections from 127.0.0.1:4118 to >127.0.0.1:8481? Also if there's any way to control the allocation range of Freenet uses only the FNP-port to talk to the internet. But look at bottom, I discovered some strange things. >ephemeral ports used during data transfer (assuming that's what they are - >for some reason I was expecting all traffic to be on my 'advertised' port of >*****, although I don't really know why). Connections to 8481 (FCP) should only occour over LAN or localhost. (Except you run a really public node with public FCP) > > >d > I found some strange things on Win2k with TCPview: [snip: Microsoft-stuff] [snip: FCP-connections to Fred as seen by Fred's process] [1244 is processnumber of Fred; example of strange entry about FNP:] java.exe:1244 TCP acer:4935 acer:0 LISTENING java.exe:1244 TCP acer:4935 216.87.111.151:17034 ESTABLISHED [1740 is Frost; example of strange entry about FCP:] java.exe:1740 TCP acer:2857 acer:0 LISTENING java.exe:1740 TCP acer:2857 localhost:8481 ESTABLISHED [snip: a lot of connections to other nodes] [Fred is listening and hold on FNP-port at same time (it's OK, like a server) :] java.exe:1244 TCP acer:16634 acer:0 LISTENING java.exe:1244 TCP acer:16634 dyn-bway-130-206.dyn.columbia.edu:4216 ESTABLISHED [snip: other inbound contacts] [snip: other connections] There are ports listed twice!?!? It seems that every connection established from a Java process has a listener on the same port. The more FCP/FNP connections, the more listening ports... But I could never connect to a port with Netcat, it's everytime refused. Is the monitoring program too slow to show the real state of a socket? Is that a problem with Sun's Java implementation? Does that happen on Linux too? Greetings, Stef _______________________________________________ devl mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hawk.freenetproject.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
