Date: Fri, 04 Jun 1999 15:25:37 -0700 From: "Kevin J. Rowett" <krowett@rowett.org> To: current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: net.inet.tcp.always_keepalive on as default ? Message-ID: <4.2.0.56.19990604151956.00af7670@rowett.org> In-Reply-To: <199906042008.NAA09127@apollo.backplane.com> References: <9906041725.aa11603@salmon.maths.tcd.ie> <4.2.0.56.19990604111235.00ae3ac0@rowett.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At 01:08 PM 6/4/99 , Matthew Dillon wrote: >: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. That's an excellent point! People with less correct implementations of TCP keepalives will use freeBSD's justification as their justification for turning on TCP keepalives by default. RFC1122 was written for a reason. Before we repeal it, we should consider why it was written in the first place. BTW, I'm in favor of making keepalives on by default. It will save me one line in the boot up sequence. KR To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4.2.0.56.19990604151956.00af7670>