Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

problems with gsoap TCP_FASTOPEN #3

Closed
ctramnitz opened this issue Dec 27, 2016 · 4 comments
Closed

problems with gsoap TCP_FASTOPEN #3

ctramnitz opened this issue Dec 27, 2016 · 4 comments

Comments

@ctramnitz
Copy link

It seems recent versions of gsoap have TCP_FASTOPEN enabled by default and leave any error handling with the application. If a kernel doesn't support TCP_FASTOPEN iiid refuses to start:

iiid[32702]: Starting iii eye-fi manager on port 59278
iiid[32702]: Exiting iii daemon, because of error condition
iiid[32702]: Exception: failed to bind()

With strace I can see this:

socket(PF_INET, SOCK_STREAM, IPPROTO_TCP) = 4
setsockopt(4, SOL_SOCKET, SO_REUSEADDR, [1], 4) = 0
setsockopt(4, SOL_SOCKET, SO_KEEPALIVE, [1], 4) = 0
setsockopt(4, SOL_SOCKET, SO_SNDBUF, [65536], 4) = 0
setsockopt(4, SOL_SOCKET, SO_RCVBUF, [65536], 4) = 0
setsockopt(4, SOL_TCP, TCP_NODELAY, [1], 4) = 0
setsockopt(4, SOL_TCP, TCP_FASTOPEN, [1], 4) = -1 ENOPROTOOPT (Protocol not available)
@hacker
Copy link
Owner

hacker commented Dec 27, 2020

Uh, I guess you resolved this one eventually? Somehow I either haven't seen it haven't had time to look into it… And it's been four years… exactly four years :)

@ctr49
Copy link

ctr49 commented Dec 27, 2020

Haha, funny. Didn't pay attention to the date. But actually I was not able to resolve this yet. Still running a version that is built against an older gsoap on an ancient version. No I was looking into this again and finally decided to move this off my NAS (which still has a kernel not supporting TCP_FASTOPEN... after 4 years) to a container running a modern system.
Not sure if this is worth fixing anymore.

@ctr49
Copy link

ctr49 commented Dec 27, 2020

I just gave it a try and actually it looks like this is resolved. An upstream gSOAP change may have fixed this (I also reported the issue to them but can't find it being mentioned in the release notes).

@hacker
Copy link
Owner

hacker commented Dec 27, 2020

aye, great, I haven't even looked into it deep enough…

@hacker hacker closed this as completed Dec 27, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants