132816 - Allow unlimited connections to localhost (persistent and non-persistent)

Status: RESOLVED WONTFIX

(Core :: Networking, enhancement)

Description

[Chuck Messenger]

Currently, there is a default limit of 2 for persistent HTTP connections to a
given domain (network.http.max-persistent-connections-per-server in all.js), and
of 4 for non-persistent connections (network.http.max-connections-per-server).

It would be useful if these limits were not imposed for connections to localhost.

An emerging use for Mozilla may be as a GUI front-end (SOAP client) for a
locally-running app which acts as a SOAP server.  It is entirely conceivable to
have several of these apps running at once, each possibly requiring one or more
persistent HTTP connections.  With a limit of 2 persistent connections to
localhost, such a scenario is not practical.

So, there's a need for a higher limit.  One could argue that a user could solve
the problem by increasing network.http.max-persistent-connections-per-server,
etc.  However, doing so would increase the limit for all domains, thus defeating
the usefulness of the limit.

Therefore, it would be quite useful to have a separate limit for connections to
localhost.  I would argue there should simply be no limit -- I can see no
rationale for such a limit.

(I'll file separate bugs relating to the same issue as it applies to local
domains, and to all domains).

Comment 1

[robbe]

I don't think generally removing this limit for localhost is a good idea. Say
you load a image-rich page from a local webserver. Bogging this server down with
a hundred connections is as silly as doing that for a remote server.

See also #172957 where I propose a different solution.

Comment 2

[Darin Fisher]

i would argue that it makes sense to have separate limits for SOAP connections
in general.  however, this bug could also be addressed by putting each SOAP
service at a unique port on localhost.  (or is there something that forces a
SOAP service to reside on port 80?)  doing so would give each service access to
2 persistent browser connections.

Comment 3

[Kevin O'Neill]

Something to consider.

In development I have both my server and client locally. If thise enhancement
goes through then I will have very different connection characteristics when the
application is used by others.

An option may be to allow the appliction to request (in a simliar fashion to how
security requests are made) and increased number of connections to localhost, or
allow the developer to set a property to enable increased localhost connections
for the application. Unfortunatly this is more difficult than a blanket increase
in the number of connections to a host because you will need to track context
specifiers. For example the application talking to http://localhost/services/
wishes unlimited connections but the application talking to
http://localhost/services-test/ may want to limit the number of connections to
simulate a remote connection.

Comment 4

[Darin Fisher]

keep in mind that win9x has a relatively low limit on the number of sockets it
can create system wide.  the limit is, i think, roughly 50.

Comment 5

[Chuck Messenger]

On comment #2: Even supposing each service had its own port, why should each
service be limited to 2 local connections?  It's easy enough to picture wanting
to have a single service supporting lots of local connections.

On comment #4: Then Win98 should (perhaps?) have some limit, leaving
unencumbered those OS's which can handle unlimited socket connections.

Comment 6

[Darin Fisher]

bottom line: the demands of web surfing and soap do not overlap nicely.  what
this really means is that we (as in the network component) need to provide our
soap component with the means to control the limits on the number of connections
based on whatever makes sense.  perhaps the soap protocol layer would be better
suited to determine what limits on the number of connections makes most sense.

Comment 7

[benc]

Since we've had issues w/ hardcoding the maning of localhost, I'd be interested
in hearing ideas on identifying what the local connection would be (check for
local interface, check via IP address, or check via domain name?)

Comment 8

[Vincent Jaubert]

This feature (or better, some separate http prefs for localhost) would also be
very usefull for freenet users

Comment 9

[Darin Fisher]

-> default owner