Re: Iperf UDP issue

To: iperf-users --at-- dast.nlanr.net
Subject: Re: Iperf UDP issue
From: Vivek Sawant <vivek --at-- cs.unc.edu>
Date: Thu, 06 Feb 2003 15:23:36 -0500
Content-type: multipart/alternative;boundary="------------060602010607040406030204"
References: <1F003D27978ABD419A4CC06B6F89CE664CB65E --at-- navexch001.navini.com>
Reply-to: Vivek Sawant <vivek --at-- cs.unc.edu>
Sender: owner-iperf-users --at-- dast.nlanr.net
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.0.2) Gecko/20021120 Netscape/7.01

I used the following temporary fix suggested by Kevin to get around the problem of server quitting for not being able to talk to the client.


--- begin Kevin's email ---
If you go through the src/Perfsocket_UDP.cpp and change all the 
FAIL_errno()'s to WARN_errno()'s that should take care of the availability 
problem, but I need to spend some more time to get a more permanent fix. 
Let me know if that works for your purposes.

Kevin

--- end Kevin's email ---

paul shields wrote:

Iperf UDP issue
It seems that iperf clients expect an acknowledgement of the last UDP packet sent and if they don't get it, resend the last packet 10 times. Also, when the client drops the connection finally, the server also quits with a can't getpeeraddress error.

1. Why does the client expect a response on UDP traffic.
2. Can the server be made to stay up in UDP mode when a client disconnects?

Paul

References:
- Iperf UDP issue
  - From: paul shields

Prev by Date: Iperf UDP issue
Next by Date: More UDP problems
Previous by thread: Iperf UDP issue
Next by thread: Re: Iperf UDP issue

Other Mailing lists | Author Index | Date Index | Subject Index | Thread Index