Re: Future developments of nsock-engines

[David Fifield <david () bamsoftware com>]

On Tue, Sep 06, 2011 at 12:53:20PM +0200, Henri Doreau wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I have recently been working on a new version of nsock to experiment
> with modern IO notification facilities[1]. I have received very
> positive feedback on it.
>
> The code now seems to be stable and efficient, successfully tested on
> numerous platforms (several flavors of GNU/Linux, FreeBSD and
> Windows). I think that these changes on nsock are valuable and I would
> suggest considering the branch for being merged.
>
> There are no known bugs anymore and I've tried to make the code as
> clean and tidy as possible. Once again, I invite people to give it a
> try or have a look at the code (see [2], "how to test").
>
> I would also appreciate some guidance about how to proceed for the
> next steps. Should I keep on adding engines or focus on documentation
> and testing?
> Despite I have a poll(2)-based engine available, my approach was to
> stick to only two engines for this development branch, to have
> something as simple as possible during the early phases. I can check
> it into the branch though, if people think that adding new engines is
> a better strategy.

I'm afraid I haven't been able to test this code yet, but I have been
following its development with intereset. I'd like you to focus on
documentation and testing, because I expect that we will merge the
select/epoll version before adding new engines.

I'm curious to know what happens for people who have really large scans,
who are actually able to exceed the 1024-socket limit of select. I think
Brandon has done that on occasion.

David Fifield
_______________________________________________
Sent through the nmap-dev mailing list
http://cgi.insecure.org/mailman/listinfo/nmap-dev
Archived at http://seclists.org/nmap-dev/