Skip to main content

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

8
  • Not needed external support: through successive whois requests, the whole bunch 82.148.97.x belong to Mobile-Broadband-Pool-No-6, ISP infrastructure... Some used IP from Qatar...
    – Hastur
    Commented Dec 15, 2015 at 13:19
  • 5
    @DmitryGrigoryev: You certainly can as far as TCP is concerned, though usually the OS will impose other kinds of resource limits. (For example, one process is usually limited to ~1000 open files on Linux, and that includes TCP connections.) Commented Dec 15, 2015 at 13:29
  • 2
    "Does this mean that I can establish more than 65536 connection from a single computer as long as destination addresses/ports are different?" there is no reason why a TCP implementation allowing this could not be written. Whether any of them actually do support it is another matter.
    – plugwash
    Commented Dec 15, 2015 at 15:57
  • 2
    @IanBoyd: But you can use the same port for more than one connection. Think about it – how does a web server handle hundreds of connections to the same server IP & port 80? Because those connections differ in source IP and port. Commented Dec 16, 2015 at 6:15
  • 3
    @DmitryGrigoryev: Whether you initiate a connection or accept it does not matter to TCP, as there's still one IP address and one port at either end. In the webserver's case, the "local IP" and "local port" are the same across all connections, for a proxy the "local IP" and "remote port" are the same, but either way that leaves two variables and the same amount of possible connections. (The TCP/IP spec even allows both sides to initiate the same connection at once.) Commented Dec 16, 2015 at 13:01