Re: performance issues

[BlackHat.Info <blackhat () needguide com>]

huh?

In my case, I've noticed fast scan performance averages ~300 seconds compare to BETA31 ~500secs. See nmap in action in 
www.blackhat.info project.

Cheers.


On Tue, 02 April 2002, "Andy Lutomirski" wrote:

> Here's a good one:
>
> I run nmap -sS -P0 -n -r -v -d -d -p1-1000 <win2k box on local ethernet>, and it takes awhile.  The debug shows that 
> retries are needed.  If I add --scan_delay 1, no (or very few) packets are dropped, and the scan completes much 
> faster.  I get the fastest results with --max_parallelism 1 (w/o scan_delay), but --max_parallelism 2 does not have 
> nearly the same effect.
>
> If I add --win_norawsock, then the speeds are much increased without either max_parallelism or scan_delay, for 
> --max_parallelism 1 is still the fastest.
>
> To add insult to injury, port 389 comes up filtered if and only if I do not set --win_nor (so that sends are over 
> real raw sockets).
>
> WTF is happening?
>
> Andy Lutomirski

-------------------------------
www.blackhat.info
"just discovering insecurity"
-------------------------------

---------------------------------------------------------------------
For help using this (nmap-dev) mailing list, send a blank email to 
nmap-dev-help () insecure org . List run by ezmlm-idx (www.ezmlm.org).