Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site ut-sally.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!ut-sally!jsq
From: jsq@ut-sally.UUCP (John Quarterman)
Newsgroups: net.unix-wizards
Subject: Re: FIN_WAIT_2 Warning:  JSQ \"fix\" bad!
Message-ID: <1700@ut-sally.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 24-Apr-85 11:06:35 EST
Article-I.D.: ut-sally.1700
Posted: Wed Apr 24 11:06:35 1985
Date-Received: Fri, 26-Apr-85 21:49:16 EST
References: <10173@brl-tgr.ARPA>
Reply-To: jsq@ut-sally.UUCP (John Quarterman)
Organization: U. Texas CS Dept., Austin, Texas
Lines: 22

Ok, folks, I have tried the scenario Muuss and Hemminger say breaks my
kludge, and they are right:  it does.  We do that kind of connection
so rarely that I never noticed.  We have connections with TOPS-20 hosts
so frequently that I *had* to have something, and not with a six hour
timeout, either.

I am currently trying Hemminger's fix in our systems.  I don't expect
to have any problems with it, as he has evidently run it for some time.
On the off chance that I do find some problem with it, I will report it.
Otherwise, I recommend using Hemminger's fix, not my kludge.

Now, I notice that I neglected to include my usual disclaimer in my
recent posting that I used my kludge and gave it out to others only
because nobody had apparently found anything better.  I will assume
that this omission accounts for the flamage level of the followups.
However, note that I never used the word "fix", I did use the word
"kludge", and I clearly stated that the kludge violated the TCP spec.
A simple note from one of you who tried the kludge to me reporting
the problem with it at the time it was found would have sufficed, eh?
-- 

John Quarterman, jsq@ut-sally.ARPA, {ihnp4,seismo,ctvax}!ut-sally!jsq