Weiguang Shi wrote:
nc might be waiting on all the interfaces; enumerating MTUs and choosing the
largest
sounds complicated, especially when some interfaces can be configured to receive
jumbo frames. Why not just use something like 64KB as the other user
suggested or something even larger?
From: Bruce M. Simpson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Weiguang Shi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2007 12:15:34 AM
Subject: Re: nc captures 1024 bytes
Looks like a netcat bug, if it doesn't tune buffers to the interface MTU.
I'm no
Looks like a netcat bug, if it doesn't tune buffers to the interface MTU.
I'm not sure if nc has a 'de facto' maintainer however I believe it is
something which was recently imported into the freebsd base system.
Still, it is better to try to field patches with the upstream maintainer
before
Weiguang Shi wrote this message on Mon, Aug 27, 2007 at 16:37 -0700:
> To get the larger packets, I have to fix another hard-coded "1024"
This is also a performance problem on slower machines... nc should be
fixed to use larger buffers, maybe to the tune of 64KB if not larger...
W/ TSO, doing 64
To get the larger packets, I have to fix another hard-coded "1024"
630 readwrite(int nfd)
631 {
632 struct pollfd pfd[2];
633 unsigned char buf[8192];
634 int n, wfd = fileno(stdin);
635 int lfd = fileno(stdout);
636 int plen;
637
638 plen = jflag
