Re: max-scan-delay not honored?

[Fyodor <fyodor () insecure org>]

On Fri, Mar 10, 2006 at 11:50:08PM +0100, Filippo Solinas wrote:
> On Fri, 10 Mar 2006 10:44:29 -0800, Fyodor wrote:
>
> Moreover, with "--max-parallelism 2", --max-scan-delay 100 seems
> to be not honored as well:

The --scan-delay is a special delay Nmap enforces between packets when
it detects certain kinds of rate limiting.  It probably isn't
detecting that sort of rate limiting, so the extra scan delay is 0.
Thus setting the maximum scan delay to 10 has no effect.  See
http://www.insecure.org/nmap/man/man-performance.html .

The reason the scan is going so slowly is entirely because of your
"--max-parallelism 2" option.  But note that the scan is going twice
as fast as in your last mail where you set it to "--max_parallelism
1".  Want the scan to go faster?  Specify a higher --max-parallelism
or don't specify it at all.  You are giving Nmap options that say "go
extraordinarily slow", and then complaining that Nmap isn't fast
enough for you.

One feature I am considering that you may like is allowing you to
specify an exact number of packets that Nmap should try to send each
second, rather than having Nmap use its own smarts.  If you haven't
taken the Nmap 2006 user survey yet, you can vote for or against this
and other features at http://www.insecure.org/nmap/survey.html .

I hope this helps,
-Fyodor



_______________________________________________
Sent through the nmap-dev mailing list
http://cgi.insecure.org/mailman/listinfo/nmap-dev