Nmap Development mailing list archives
Re: [PATCH] new --min-retries options
From: Jon Passki <jon.passki () hursk com>
Date: Thu, 6 Jul 2006 23:08:40 -0500
On Jul 6, 2006, at 8:35 PM, Fyodor wrote:
On Wed, Jul 05, 2006 at 10:14:10PM -0500, Jon Passki wrote:Hello All, Today I was scanning using an unreliable network (shared wireless) and had some packet loss. I had root access to the host I was scanning, which allowed me to review the firewall logs and run a tcpdump of the traffic. There was 2% to 20% packet loss, depending upon --max-parallelism and --min-parallelism settings. The host had two ports open and four ports closed, will all the others filtered. Even with what seemed the default two retransmissions there still was loss.Did you get wrong results with the default Nmap timing behavior, or had you also specified aggressive timing options such as --min-parallelism when this happened?
The latter. With one host, --min-parallelism 40, and -T4 as the default. I can retry w/ default settings on the host when I'm back at the location to see if there's any difference. Jon _______________________________________________ Sent through the nmap-dev mailing list http://cgi.insecure.org/mailman/listinfo/nmap-dev
Current thread:
- [PATCH] new --min-retries options Jon Passki (Jul 05)
- Re: [PATCH] new --min-retries options Fyodor (Jul 06)
- Re: [PATCH] new --min-retries options Jon Passki (Jul 06)
- Re: [PATCH] new --min-retries options Jon Passki (Jul 07)
- Re: [PATCH] new --min-retries options Fyodor (Jul 06)
