From: nospam@needed.invalid
On Sun, 12/14/2025 5:09 AM, T wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> Two me over two years, but I finally figured it out!
> AAAAHHHH !!!!!!
>
> Fedora 43
> vsftpd-3.0.5-11.fc42.x86_64
>
> Windows 10 & 11
> Cobian Reflector (all versions)
>
> Cobian Reflector reports this error message when backing up to vsftp:
>
> Only one usage of each socket address (protocol/network address/
> port) is normally permitted
>
> I have asked this question a couple of times here thinking the
> problem was vsftp. It was not.
>
> I have reported the issue to Cobian thinking maybe it was his issue.
> I also was not.
>
> It turn out that the issue is with the Windows Operating system itself.
> Windows defaults
> MaxUserPort to 4000 (sockets)
> TcpTimedWaitDelay to 120 (seconds)
>
> Cobian is throwing a YUGE bit bucket at vsftp and runs out of sockets,
> then tries to reuse them before the "TcpTimedWaitDelay" expires.
>
>
> Here is the fix.
>
> REGEDIT4
> ; References:
> ; https://help.socketlabs.com/docs/how-to-fix-error-only-one-u
age-of-each-socket-address-protocolnetwork-addressport-is-normally-permitted
> ; https://stackoverflow.com/questions/36669406/cant-find-maxus
rport-registry-editor
> ; https://superuser.com/questions/320763/how-to-change-tcp-tim
-wait-delay-in-windows-7-2008-server
> ; https://hstechdocs.helpsystems.com/manuals/globalscape/archi
e/secureserver3/Windows_Registry_keys_for_TCP_IP_Performance_Tuning.htm
> ;
> ; This is to correct the Cobian Reflector error when using vsFTP, and maybe
other problems too:
> ; Only one usage of each socket address (protocol/network
address/port) is normally permitted
> ;
> ; MaxUserPort default to 4000 (sockets)
> ; TimesWaitDelay default is 120 (seconds)
>
> [HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Services\Tcpip\Parameters]
> "MaxUserPort"=dword:0000fffe
> "TcpTimedWaitDelay"=dword:0000001e
>
> -T
Now, having written this missive of yours,
doesn't something smell funny ???
Why would an OS only have 4000 sockets, if the sockets are
to be used in such a willy-nilly fashion ?
If only 4000 are provided, this likely implies "Cobian will open one socket,
a streaming protocol will run in the socket, an agent at
the other end of the socket will decode the protocol and
handle a multitude of files or file-equivalents". Then
we have only opened one socket, and we're streaming over it.
We could handle an entire session, maybe an entire partition,
an entire disk, something like that.
It sounds most unusual to be trashing a resource on an OS
this easily. It implies it is being used in a cavalier manner.
And by cavalier, I mean that you could be losing performance
and waiting longer for that backup to finish than you have to.
Opening just one socket, means paying for only one socket
setup time.
The only thing that comes close to this, is running Torrents
and causing a router to crash or reboot :-) But at least there,
there is a justification, because there might really be a
thousand data sources you're contacting over the Internet.
And the 2 minute timer for that, that causes a problem, waiting
for a resource to be de-allocated so another Torrent connection
can use it. That's the only scenario that comes to mind for
that sort of resource usage.
FTP is capable of doing all sorts of things. And doing one file
at a time over FTP, please tell me they are not doing that.
You can "cd" and "lcd" in FTP (that means you can traverse
both the source tree and the dest tree), you can put files or folders
or get files or get folders. You could push a "tar" file to
the other end of that link over FTP, if you want to send
a solid block and only need one socket.
This story needs some other sort of ending.
Paul
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
