Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 4.3bsd-beta 6/6/85; site ucbvax.ARPA
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxn!ihnp4!cbosgd!ucbvax!tcp-ip
From: tcp-ip@ucbvax.ARPA
Newsgroups: fa.tcp-ip
Subject: Re:  A Noop Strategy for TCP
Message-ID: <9324@ucbvax.ARPA>
Date: Thu, 25-Jul-85 15:35:13 EDT
Article-I.D.: ucbvax.9324
Posted: Thu Jul 25 15:35:13 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 27-Jul-85 03:14:36 EDT
Sender: daemon@ucbvax.ARPA
Organization: University of California at Berkeley
Lines: 21

From: louie@umd5 (Louis Mamakos)

Please! Don't try to 'fix' TCP.  I don't want my TCP to generate network
traffic on an idle connection.  The TELNET protocol has a method to 
accomplish what you want;  send a TELNET NOOP control sequence, or
negotiate the timing mark option.

If your application cares about an idle connection, let it probe the remote
host.  
	
If you are running IP over an X.25 PDN where you pay by the packet, having
and idle TCP connection stay idle can save you real dollars.  I'm sure
the CSNET folks can talk to this issue.

Now, if I can just get the stupid user TELNET programs out there that
talk to my line-at-a-time Sperry system to send the CR-LF sequence instead
of just a LF to end the line.  The 4.2 BSD TELNET is a notable offender.

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