Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site umd5.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!umcp-cs!cvl!umd5!louie
From: louie@umd5.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.unix-wizards,net.lan
Subject: Re: KEEPALIVE's do not always work.
Message-ID: <548@umd5.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 30-May-85 21:31:50 EDT
Article-I.D.: umd5.548
Posted: Thu May 30 21:31:50 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 1-Jun-85 12:00:32 EDT
References: <1284@hammer.UUCP>
Reply-To: louie@umd5.UUCP (Louis Mamakos)
Organization: U of Md, CSC, College Park, Md
Lines: 15
Xref: linus net.unix-wizards:10570 net.lan:673

I would have to question the existance in TCP of a KEEPALIVE construct at 
all.  Suppose that I want to have a connection alive for many hours at a 
time; why should I force traffic to flow across it at periodic intervals?
This is a real issue if your link-level network is a PDN, and you get charged
by the packet.

I you want to verify the existance of the connection, why not have whatever
application that uses TCP make sure that the connection is "warm".  This can
easily be done in the case of a TELNET session by sending a timing-mark
TELNET option every so often.

-- 
Louis A. Mamakos WA3YMH   University of Maryland, Computer Science Center
 Internet: louie@umd5.arpa
 UUCP: {seismo!umcp-cs, ihnp4!rlgvax}!cvl!umd5!louie