Is there NATing between these two hosts? RFC 5382 has some guidelines on idle timeout for established connections, you might be hitting that limit.
-Michel On Tue, Apr 9, 2013 at 9:36 AM, Garrett Smith <[email protected]> wrote: > I don't know if this is a 0MQ question or a general networking > question. I know that I'm confused. > > I'm troubleshooting some message delivery problems and I've run across > this scenario: > > The ESTABLISHED tcp connections on one server don't match the > corresponding connections on the other server. I'll call one server > "router-server" and the other "dealer-server" (corresponding to the > role and 0MQ socket type one each server). > > On the "router-server" I see these connections to the "dealer-server": > > tcp 0 0 192.168.1.10:1234 192.168.1.11:52726 > ESTABLISHED > tcp 0 0 192.168.1.10:1234 192.168.1.11:42556 > ESTABLISHED > tcp 0 0 192.168.1.10:1234 192.168.1.11:52728 > ESTABLISHED > tcp 0 0 192.168.1.10:1234 192.168.1.11:42774 > ESTABLISHED > tcp 0 0 192.168.1.10:1234 192.168.1.11:52727 > ESTABLISHED > tcp 0 0 192.168.1.10:1234 192.168.1.11:42563 > ESTABLISHED > > On the "dealer-server" I see these to the "router-server": > > tcp 0 0 192.168.1.11:52728 192.168.1.10:1234 > ESTABLISHED > tcp 0 0 192.168.1.11:42563 192.168.1.10:1234 > ESTABLISHED > tcp 0 0 192.168.1.11:42556 192.168.1.10:1234 > ESTABLISHED > > These were listed by "netstat -na" on the respective servers at the same > time. > > This scenario seems to only apply to the problem connection -- the > non-problem router/dealer server pairs have the expected one-to-one > established connections. > > Garrett > _______________________________________________ > zeromq-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev >
_______________________________________________ zeromq-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
