Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 04 Jun 1999 18:12:28 +0200
From:      Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@critter.freebsd.dk>
To:        David Malone <dwmalone@maths.tcd.ie>
Cc:        Pierre Beyssac <beyssac@enst.fr>, Matthew Dillon <dillon@apollo.backplane.com>, current@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: net.inet.tcp.always_keepalive on as default ? 
Message-ID:  <4586.928512748@critter.freebsd.dk>
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 04 Jun 1999 17:06:54 BST." <19990604170654.A8800@salmon.maths.tcd.ie> 

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message <19990604170654.A8800@salmon.maths.tcd.ie>, David Malone writes:

>It might be nice to have two keepalive timeouts like Nate suggested.
>You'd have a short one, which applies if the application turns on
>keepalive or you have alwayskeepalive on. Then you'd have a long
>one, which applies to all connections regardless. Then:

Then you might as well implement per socket adjustable keepalives.

--
Poul-Henning Kamp             FreeBSD coreteam member
phk@FreeBSD.ORG               "Real hackers run -current on their laptop."
FreeBSD -- It will take a long time before progress goes too far!


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?4586.928512748>