Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!lll-winken!ncis.tis.llnl.gov!dog.ee.lbl.gov!pasteur!ucbvax!ACADVM1.UOTTAWA.CA!PETEHIC
From: PETEHIC@ACADVM1.UOTTAWA.CA (Pete Hickey)
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip
Subject: Re: Why not use SO_KEEPALIVE?
Message-ID: <90Nov16.172516est.57502@ugw.utcs.utoronto.ca>
Date: 16 Nov 90 22:18:37 GMT
References: <tcp-ip-relay@NIC.DDN.MIL>
Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Organization: The Internet
Lines: 10

Why not use keep-alives?

I'm no expert by any means, but in my opinion, it should be the
job of a specific server/application how long they want to wait
for their timeouts.  Some applications may decide that if nothing
came in from the socket for x seconds, they kill/close it.  The
application can decide on the time if and when it wants.  It should
not be the job of the lower levels of the protocol.

-Pete