From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Feb 10 07:30:48 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: net@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 25DA0A5A; Sun, 10 Feb 2013 07:30:48 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from lars@netapp.com) Received: from mx12.netapp.com (mx12.netapp.com [216.240.18.77]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C4D63CD0; Sun, 10 Feb 2013 07:30:47 +0000 (UTC) X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.84,636,1355126400"; d="scan'208";a="18822542" Received: from smtp1.corp.netapp.com ([10.57.156.124]) by mx12-out.netapp.com with ESMTP; 09 Feb 2013 23:30:40 -0800 Received: from vmwexceht01-prd.hq.netapp.com (exchsmtp.hq.netapp.com [10.106.76.239]) by smtp1.corp.netapp.com (8.13.1/8.13.1/NTAP-1.6) with ESMTP id r1A7UdZw018180; Sat, 9 Feb 2013 23:30:39 -0800 (PST) Received: from SACEXCMBX01-PRD.hq.netapp.com ([169.254.2.54]) by vmwexceht01-prd.hq.netapp.com ([10.106.76.239]) with mapi id 14.02.0328.009; Sat, 9 Feb 2013 23:30:39 -0800 From: "Eggert, Lars" To: Kevin Oberman Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add a new TCP_IGNOREIDLE socket option Thread-Topic: [PATCH] Add a new TCP_IGNOREIDLE socket option Thread-Index: AQHN+Nyo0gmhYvjjiEa9ZKUxU2VFfphWVHgAgAARXYCAFuhUAIAAFkGAgABOyICAAb3EAIACyoSAgADxdICAACiAAA== Date: Sun, 10 Feb 2013 07:30:38 +0000 Message-ID: References: <201301221511.02496.jhb@freebsd.org> <50FF06AD.402@networx.ch> <061B4EA5-6A93-48A0-A269-C2C3A3C7E77C@lakerest.net> <201302060746.43736.jhb@freebsd.org> <511292C9.4040307@mu.org> <51166019.9040104@mu.org> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.104.60.118] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: Alfred Perlstein , Randall Stewart , John Baldwin , "" X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 10 Feb 2013 07:30:48 -0000 On Feb 10, 2013, at 6:05, Kevin Oberman wrote: > One idea that popped into my head (and may be completely ridiculous, > is to make its availability dependent on a kernel option and have > warning in NOTES about it contravening normal and accepted practice > and that it can cause serious problems both for yourself and for > others using the network. Also, if it gets merged, don't call it TCP_IGNOREIDLE. Call it TCP_BLAST_DA= NGEROUSLY_AFTER_IDLE. Lars=