From owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Tue May 28 18:42:29 2019 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A804D15A8579 for ; Tue, 28 May 2019 18:42:29 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from doug@safeport.com) Received: from bucksport.safeport.com (bucksport.safeport.com [198.74.231.101]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AF0B08C757 for ; Tue, 28 May 2019 18:42:28 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from doug@safeport.com) Received: from bucksport.safeport.com (bucksport.safeport.com [198.74.231.101]) by bucksport.safeport.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id x4SIgMGd030761 for ; Tue, 28 May 2019 14:42:22 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from doug@safeport.com) Date: Tue, 28 May 2019 14:42:22 -0400 (EDT) From: Doug Denault To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ssh timeout question Message-ID: User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (BSF 1167 2008-08-23) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; format=flowed; charset=US-ASCII X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.4.3 (bucksport.safeport.com [198.74.231.101]); Tue, 28 May 2019 14:42:22 -0400 (EDT) X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: AF0B08C757 X-Spamd-Bar: +++ Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; spf=pass (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of doug@safeport.com designates 198.74.231.101 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=doug@safeport.com X-Spamd-Result: default: False [3.70 / 15.00]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; FAKE_REPLY(1.00)[]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+ip4:198.74.231.101]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; PREVIOUSLY_DELIVERED(0.00)[freebsd-questions@freebsd.org]; TO_DN_NONE(0.00)[]; NEURAL_SPAM_MEDIUM(0.65)[0.649,0]; RCPT_COUNT_ONE(0.00)[1]; DMARC_NA(0.00)[safeport.com]; NEURAL_SPAM_SHORT(0.74)[0.744,0]; MX_GOOD(-0.01)[bucksport.safeport.com]; NEURAL_SPAM_LONG(0.88)[0.882,0]; RCVD_COUNT_ONE(0.00)[1]; RCVD_NO_TLS_LAST(0.10)[]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; R_DKIM_NA(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; ASN(0.00)[asn:11288, ipnet:198.74.228.0/22, country:US]; IP_SCORE(0.53)[asn: 11288(2.71), country: US(-0.06)]; ONCE_RECEIVED(0.10)[] X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 28 May 2019 18:42:29 -0000 On Tue, 28 May 2019, RW via freebsd-questions wrote: > On Tue, 28 May 2019 07:37:36 -0400 > John Johnstone wrote: > > >> It's very common for HTTP connections between web browsers and >> servers to also go idle before they are explicitly closed. This >> results in the states being removed prematurely by the router. This >> isn't noticed by the user though since the browser just opens a new >> connection to the server. >> >> My guess would be that DHCP or number of active connections are not a >> factor in your case. > > I doubt it's to do with timing out an idle connection since pine is > polling for new mail ever 150s. Thank you all for comments and suggestions. It would not have occurred to me to set the keep-alive value that small, I will try that. That is a lot less irritating than my print a char script that mucks up emails. In google I found someone suggesting setting "IPQoS throughput" in $HOME/.ssh/config. I am going to try both when I next go to a 100% fail location. I'll report back. I also find it strange that sitting in pine triggers the timeout but sitting idle for days does not. Doug _____ Douglas Denault http://www.safeport.com doug@safeport.com Voice: 301-217-9220 Fax: 301-217-9277