On 12/12/07, Daniel Ouellet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I am only > saying that using PF in front of httpd will reduce the possible number > of httpd close_wait you might see. By default httpd can only support up > to 256 connections, unless you increase it and compile it again.
I don't understand why pf would reduce this. Every single CLOSE_WAIT stems from a former established connection, and pf can nothing do to convince httpd to close its socket. No rogue clients involved here. > lead you in that path, then I am sorry. What will affect your close_wait > time (when you reach that point) are the tcp stack value, witch I am > reluctant to suggest to adjust as they sure can create way more harm > then goods. I don't think there is a systl for that. TCP connections don't expire by default, if you not make them, and the same should go for a half-closed one. There are perfectly legit reasons for long open half-closed TCP connections. > My point with PF here was that it would reduce the possible numbers of > close_wait state you could possibly see in the first place, witch is one > of the original goal of the question. Why? --knitti
