Date: Tue, 9 Sep 1997 21:57:31 -0600 (MDT) From: Wes Peters <softweyr@xmission.com> To: Nate Williams <nate@mt.sri.com> Cc: stable@freebsd.org, Don Croyle <croyle@gelemna.ft-wayne.in.us> Subject: Re: 2.2.5 release, can it be postponed? Message-ID: <199709100357.VAA23751@obie.softweyr.ml.org> In-Reply-To: <199709091850.MAA25301@rocky.mt.sri.com> References: <341565dd.68501361@smtp-gw01.ny.us.ibm.net> <19970909123253.13741@vinyl.quickweb.com> <86d8mie5y0.fsf@gelemna.ft-wayne.in.us> <199709091850.MAA25301@rocky.mt.sri.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Don Croyle lamented:
% It often takes me two or three tries to connect to my ISP, by which
% time a program that's attempting to open a socket has usually timed
% out.
Nate Williams writes:
> Try the ping trick. It works. Also, PPP's auto mode is as good as any
> other on-demand product I've ever used. The time-out problem is a
> function of TCP/IP, not of PPP since it can't do anything with packets
> when the link is down, and it's doing everything it can to get the
> connection up, so if the first couple of attempts fail, the TCP/IP
> protocol will give up.
Exactly. Believe me, I've been through this forwards, backwards,
sidewards, and every other -wards in the last nine months. I'm proud to
say the TCP/IP dial-up router I've been involved in building is AS
RELIABLE at connecting as FreeBSD ppp. ;^) (We route faster and do NAT
faster, but that is mostly a function of running far less software; we
typically have only 4 or 5 tasks running at a time.)
If you've configured ppp -auto correctly, it will do as good a job as
any. You may want to look into writing a little script that will try 4
or 5 times doing a ping -c 1 before attempting to connect to the on-line
service.
--
"Where am I, and what am I doing in this handbasket?"
Wes Peters Softweyr LLC
http://www.xmission.com/~softweyr softweyr@xmission.com
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199709100357.VAA23751>