Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Unix TCP Equivalent Settings in Windows 2000?

Posted by Cliff on from the RWIN-SWIN-and-MTU dept.

sameerdesai asks: "While working on a project that required client-server functionality I was running into processes that wouldn't finish and eventually hang. While running packet tracing, I found out the tcp_fin_wait_2_timeout setting on the server side (UNIX) was too low for the Windows client, and after increasing that value it worked great. I am trying to apply a similar technique for a Windows server and was wondering what the equivalent registry key is for UNIX's tcp_fin_wait_2_timeout setting? Also, is there a guide out there that compares TCP setting in UNIX with Windows?"

3 of 65 comments (clear)

  1. Danger Wil Robinson... by hoggoth · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I will not deploy any software that requires me to start tweaking obscure registry values that change my server's basic TCP behavior. I'm sure I'm not alone in this.

    I don't know what you are planning to do with this project, ie: sell it to the masses, make it open source, use it in house. Just keep this in mind.

    --
    - For the complete works of Shakespeare: cat /dev/random (may take some time)
    1. Re:Danger Wil Robinson... by Curtman · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Thats a very unrealistic thing to say. There is no magical configuration that will be optimal in all circumstances. Tweaking your registry to try and get a few extra FPS out of Doom3 is one thing, but administering a large database with many users is something completely different.

  2. Fishy by ezzzD55J · · Score: 4, Insightful
    This state is the amount of time a TCP implementation will keep a TCP connection open that it has closed itself, i.e., sent a FIN for (it has no more data to send). However, the other TCP is still allowed to send as much data as it likes, until it sends a FIN (once that FIN is ACKked by this side, _then_ the connection is really released - all that remains is the blue/red army problem which isn't the topic now).

    So, what is this application doing relying on a timeout value in this phase? It would be terrible to be dependent on a TCP implementation in an application!