Re: RPC clnt_create() adress already in use

[Corinna Vinschen <corinna-cygwin@cygwin.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2600 bytes --]

On Feb  5 15:06, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> On Feb  5 14:34, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> > On Feb  5 12:26, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> > > To reiterate the problem we observe:
> > > 
> > > - socket()
> > > - setsockopt (SO_REUSEADDR)
> > > - bind() succeeds
> > > - connect() fails with EADDRINUSE while socket is still in TIME_WAIT
> > > 
> > > using bindresvport in place of bind only marginally changes the
> > > situation, in particular if the second parameter is set and requests a
> > > port number != 0.  What happens in that case is that bindresvport calls
> > > bind with this port number and checks if bind returns EADDRINUSE.
> > > 
> > > Only then it tries to bind other port numbers in the reserved range.
> > > But we now know that bind will never return EADDINUSE if the SO_REUSEADDR
> > > socket option has been set.
> > > 
> > > Even assuming the process calls bindresvport(sock, NULL) we may end up
> > > returning a port number already in use if the process is the only Cygwin
> > > process on the system.  The reason is that Cygwin uses a round robin
> > > approach which relies on having a globally shared value called
> > > last_used_bindresvport.  If the process is the only Cygwin process on
> > > the system, this information is lost after exiting the process, so the
> > > next process will start with the same start port number and bind will
> > > again fail to notice the client with EADDRINUSE.
> > > 
> > > What potential solutions to this problem do we have?
> > > 
> > > - bindresvport could enforce SO_EXCLUSIVEADDRUSE temporarily to make
> > >   sure bind fails.
> > 
> > Nope, no way.  Even enforcing SO_EXCLUSIVEADDRUSE results in the
> > second bind succeeding and the subsequent connect failing.  The
> > entire SO_REUSEADDR/SO_EXCLUSIVEADDRUSE semantics only works as
> > desired on the server side apparently
> > 
> > > - bindresvport could check every local address for being free prior
> > >   to calling bind.  However, there's a potential race here.
> > > 
> > > - DisconnectEx?  Never tried this Winsock extension but it might be
> > >   worth a shot.
> 
> I think I have a very simple solution for the scenario which calls
> bindresvport with port number.  Still looking for a solution for
> the second problem...

I've pushed a few patches and uploaded new developer snapshots to
https://cygwin.com/snapshots.  Please give them a try.


Thanks,
Corinna

-- 
Corinna Vinschen                  Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Maintainer                 cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Red Hat

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]