Thanks! yes all good, its been just wild few months
@SumanthLingappa2 ай бұрын
Take care brother. You are an inspiration
@mohammadtoficmohammad35942 ай бұрын
Glad to hear you Hussein
@lakhveerchahal2 ай бұрын
Love to hear these type of stories! Keep the bugs coming 😄
@sebastianorellano67782 ай бұрын
Man, i love your videos ! Keep up with the good work and take care of yourself !!
@xD-saleem2 ай бұрын
Thanks for this. Hope you been well akhi. Take care!!
@virajsingh88652 ай бұрын
What if new 25k more clients come, same problem again
@ryan-bo2xi2 ай бұрын
Thanks Hussein for sharing. What was the fix ? Just curious . Did you change the custom client handler logic . Also does a using a connection pool from the client help with limited connections to reuse .
@CODFactory2 ай бұрын
At 08:50 you mentioned we are talking IPv4 here, port is 32 bit, so its 65k....but it is incorrect...port is 16 bit, that's why its 65k....also, does ipv4 vs 6 matter in case of port? we still have 16 bit isn't it?
@parimi0012 ай бұрын
I had the same question
@andreffrosa2 ай бұрын
yes, the port size is independent of the IP version and is always 16 bit.
@MarekKnapek2 ай бұрын
Yes, little bit more precise: Port number is not a thing in IP, IP knows nothing about port numbers, it doesn't care (both IPv4 and IPv6). Port number is a TCP thing, and independently a UDP thing and SCTP thing.
@hnasr2 ай бұрын
nice catch, Good point yes my bad its 16 bit so 65k and it won’t matter even its ipv6 because port is still 16 bit.
@kamalzubairov23442 ай бұрын
One way to alleviate this problem is to create a new virtual NIC with new IP address, which gives you additional 25K ports
@fyazmanknojiya22982 ай бұрын
I’m stress out on Managing third party TCP Connection call using custom port range. If I complete I will text you the code. 😅😊
@autohmae2 ай бұрын
Always fun mystery, would have been better video with the explanation at the start and have the reveal in the middle of the video and then explain what it means
@echo_adnanabbas2 ай бұрын
Hello sir, big fan
@shivansh23012 ай бұрын
did you start glitching at 6:45 😆
@hnasr2 ай бұрын
😅
@kjuarez292 ай бұрын
I disagree with you about the need to understand the process slowing down the process of fixing it. I was recently working on something where the more we understood what the issue was and the complexities that existed at different layers, the more we had a whole picture of what parts of the system were affected. Someimes knowing what the problem is, is not as important as to the breadth of the issue. Needing to fully understand the issue can give insight into the whole picture, saving time with understanding the actual fix. In fact, the "simple" fix may not be the one you want.
@hnasr2 ай бұрын
I understand. sometimes it is very difficult to understand the full picture in complex systems I do agree with that. And when you try you get sucked in into a large vortex and I admit I have been there and gave up too. This particular time the understanding was obtainable. but yeah finding that balance as to when to pursue vs to when to stop is tricky.