On 12/12/07, Daniel Ouellet <daniel@presscom.net> wrote:
quoted text
> 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.

quoted text
> 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.

quoted text
> 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