From owner-freebsd-current Fri Jun 4 13: 8:21 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from apollo.backplane.com (apollo.backplane.com [209.157.86.2]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 93AFB15595 for ; Fri, 4 Jun 1999 13:08:19 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from dillon@apollo.backplane.com) Received: (from dillon@localhost) by apollo.backplane.com (8.9.3/8.9.1) id NAA09127; Fri, 4 Jun 1999 13:08:18 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from dillon) Date: Fri, 4 Jun 1999 13:08:18 -0700 (PDT) From: Matthew Dillon Message-Id: <199906042008.NAA09127@apollo.backplane.com> To: "Kevin J. Rowett" Cc: David Malone , Poul-Henning Kamp , current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: net.inet.tcp.always_keepalive on as default ? References: <9906041725.aa11603@salmon.maths.tcd.ie> <4.2.0.56.19990604111235.00ae3ac0@rowett.org> Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG :had not been done, then the Internet would not have grown as it did today. : :The central issue of keepalives is that, for one machine, they don't create :a significant load. Multiplied by the number of machines on the Internet, :it can become a problem. As I said. People are arguing about keepalives without knowing how they work. NO! I will repeat that: NO. There is NO significant bandwidth. Every single machine on the entire internet could turn on keepalives and you would not notice the difference. Someone give me a sledgehammer! No, make that two! -Matt Matthew Dillon To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message