Date: Sun, 06 Jun 1999 15:57:41 +0900 From: Tomoaki NISHIYAMA <tomoaki@biol.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp> To: dillon@apollo.backplane.com Cc: tomoaki@biol.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp Subject: Re: net.inet.tcp.always_keepalive on as default ? Message-ID: <19990606155741R.tomoaki@moss.nibb.ac.jp> In-Reply-To: <199906060620.XAA17657@apollo.backplane.com> References: <199906042101.OAA03028@biggusdiskus.flyingfox.com> <199906042004.NAA09067@apollo.backplane.com> <19990606022955.C17345@matrix.42.org> <199906060620.XAA17657@apollo.backplane.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
From: Matthew Dillon <dillon@apollo.backplane.com>
Subject: Re: net.inet.tcp.always_keepalive on as default ?
Date: Sat, 5 Jun 1999 23:20:20 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <199906060620.XAA17657@apollo.backplane.com>
dillon> As far as dial-on-demand goes, that also makes no real difference.
dillon> There are very few two-way dial-on-demand systems. Usually
Two-way dial-on-demand systems may be few but actually exist.
In that case, a keep alive packet may cause an extra charge of 10 yen
(about US$0.08), which can be significant if the amount of other traffic
is small.
Note that I am not necessarily against keep alive, if there is a
benefit over that charge.
--------
Tomoaki Nishiyama
e-mail:tomoaki@biol.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp
Department of Biological Sciences,
Graduate School of Science, The University of Tokyo
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?19990606155741R.tomoaki>