Re: Socket question..
Available news archives: comp.lang.tcl - comp.lang.python - comp.security.firewalls - sci.crypt - comp.lang.php - comp.lang.javascript
Google
 
Web news.hping.org


comp.lang.tcl archive

Re: Socket question..

From: Darren New <dnew@san.rr.com>
Date: Wed May 25 2005 - 18:56:31 CEST

Peter Linich wrote:
> The best solution is to ensure that there is regularly traffic between
> the hosts, like a heartbeat or no op, and that each side has a timeout
> that triggers if it doesn't receive the heartbeat from the other side.

This is actually what the socket KEEPALIVE option is for, but every
TCP-knowlegable person I've asked about it has dissed it for reasons
incomprehensible to me. Basically, if you set this, the socket
retransmits every 15 minutes or so the last packet sent, and expects an
ACK to it.

Oh, and the other thing that will do this is having a NAT box in the
middle that sees a lack of traffic and throws away the mapping. Very
annoying, especially since in my experience the NAT will do this faster
than the KEEPALIVE will retry.

-- 
   Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
     The samba was clearly inspired
     by the margarita.
Received on Thu Sep 29 14:19:00 2005