Re: Socket-level timeouts?

[Chris Adams <chris@improbable.org>]

On Apr 9, 2008, at 4:00 AM, Philip Guenther wrote:
> In versions before 2.4.4, LDAP_OPT_TIMEOUT had no effect.  Starting  
> in version 2.4.4 it sets the default timeout for reading the  
> requested result in ldap_result().

This sounds like exactly what we've needed it - that ends up in poll()/ 
select(), both of which should handle our malevolent server scenario.

> > I understand the current situation but as a user it would feel more  
> > correct for LDAP_OPT_NETWORK_TIMEOUT to mean "try the next server  
> > if a response is not obtained within this time", covering the  
> > additional class of failures where an LDAP server is partially up  
> > as we cannot guarantee minute-level admin response times to restart  
> > a failing server.
>
> Hmm, what do you think the distinction between  
> LDAP_OPT_NETWORK_TIMEOUT and LDAP_OPT_TIMEOUT should be?  (Neither  
> of which should be confused with LDAP_OPT_TIMELIMIT, of course.)


Perhaps the difference between how long it will wait for a given  
server to response (LDAP_OPT_NETWORK_TIMEOUT) and how long it will  
spend before giving up on the call (LDAP_OPT_TIMEOUT) so it will  
eventually time out if it can't contact any of the servers? The latter  
case can be useful in odd networking environments where connectivity  
creatively broken (e.g. a "smart" gateway which attempts to spoof any  
IP it thinks your laptop is using as a gateway) - while it would be if  
hotels stopped using that kind of stuff, laptops need to recover.

Chris

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature