tcp

问题 Do reserved TCP/IP ports require that a program is running and bound to the port? If no such program is running or exists, can another program use this port? For example, on Linux, port 7 is reserved for an echo server. I assume there is some program running and is bound to port 7 of the machine. The program basically echos back input. If this program is stopped, will port 7 be released? If I wrote my own echo server and bound it to some other port, wouldn't this port be released once my

问题 Do reserved TCP/IP ports require that a program is running and bound to the port? If no such program is running or exists, can another program use this port? For example, on Linux, port 7 is reserved for an echo server. I assume there is some program running and is bound to port 7 of the machine. The program basically echos back input. If this program is stopped, will port 7 be released? If I wrote my own echo server and bound it to some other port, wouldn't this port be released once my

问题 Do reserved TCP/IP ports require that a program is running and bound to the port? If no such program is running or exists, can another program use this port? For example, on Linux, port 7 is reserved for an echo server. I assume there is some program running and is bound to port 7 of the machine. The program basically echos back input. If this program is stopped, will port 7 be released? If I wrote my own echo server and bound it to some other port, wouldn't this port be released once my

问题 In this old project (from 2002), It says that if you split a file into multiple chunks and then transmit each chunk using a different socket, it will arrive much faster than transmitting it as a whole using one socket. I also remember reading (many years ago) that some download manager also uses this technique. How accurate is this? 回答1: Given that a single TCP connection with large windows or small RTT can saturate any network link, I don't see what benefit you expect from multiple TCP

问题 In this old project (from 2002), It says that if you split a file into multiple chunks and then transmit each chunk using a different socket, it will arrive much faster than transmitting it as a whole using one socket. I also remember reading (many years ago) that some download manager also uses this technique. How accurate is this? 回答1: Given that a single TCP connection with large windows or small RTT can saturate any network link, I don't see what benefit you expect from multiple TCP

问题 I'm trying with no luck to connect a device to a .Net (4.5.2) server. It's a TCP connection opened by the device, that uses TLS 1.2. On the server side, I have a standard .Net implementation of a TCP Server: SslStream wrapped through DotNetty I cannot change anything on the device Any .Net client can successfully connect to my server using a secured TLS connection. It's working when trying with CURL too, so I've concluded my TCP server works fine. So I've compared (using Wireshark) what was

问题 I can find any documentatin anywhere and would like to know what would be the best method of send multiple messages as fast as possible. for example if I had 300 devices recieivng messages from one server would it be better to send out one big message and have the devices pick out the parts that they need or send 300 messages but at 1/300 of the size. They would only be small stings so the 300 devies would only be getting 6 bytes each Does it make a difference? Thanks in advanced. 回答1: If the

问题 I want to retrieve some data with an HttpWebRequest (GET): var request = (HttpWebRequest)WebRequest.Create(myUri); request.Timeout = 5 * 60 * 1000; request.ReadWriteTimeout = 5 * 60 * 1000; // request.ServicePoint.SetTcpKeepAlive(true, 5 * 1000, 1000); var response = request.GetResponse(); Unfortunately the computation on the server can take two or more minutes. So between me sending the header and finally receiving the data in the response stream the socket connection is idle. With curl or a

问题 I want to retrieve some data with an HttpWebRequest (GET): var request = (HttpWebRequest)WebRequest.Create(myUri); request.Timeout = 5 * 60 * 1000; request.ReadWriteTimeout = 5 * 60 * 1000; // request.ServicePoint.SetTcpKeepAlive(true, 5 * 1000, 1000); var response = request.GetResponse(); Unfortunately the computation on the server can take two or more minutes. So between me sending the header and finally receiving the data in the response stream the socket connection is idle. With curl or a

问题 I've tried to write a basic TCP hole puncher for a firewall in Python 3 using the principles outlined in this article. I'm having trouble getting anything to connect, though. Here is the code: #!/usr/bin/python3 import sys import socket import _thread as thread def client(): c = socket.socket() c.setsockopt(socket.SOL_SOCKET, socket.SO_REUSEADDR, 1) c.setsockopt(socket.SOL_SOCKET, socket.SO_REUSEPORT, 1) c.bind((socket.gethostbyname(socket.gethostname()), int(sys.argv[3]))) while(c.connect_ex