[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAHo-Oozuw3szyZU_CqTph76bQfVgtppFgKCdRJ8GfHeG-zuuSQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2015 16:12:25 -0800
From: Maciej Żenczykowski <zenczykowski@...il.com>
To: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Cc: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@...gle.com>,
hannes@...essinduktion.org, stephen@...workplumber.org,
Linux NetDev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, ek@...gle.com,
dtor@...gle.com
Subject: Re: Add a SOCK_DESTROY operation to close sockets from userspace
> Having comments like "look, just implement application keepalives" is
> not going to work [1][2]. This is terrible, and show lack of
> understanding of the problem. We are not dealing with DC communications
> here. (I wish !)
There's a 3rd reason: keepalives (tcp or application) are actually
undesirable because they burn through your battery.
It's far better to do keepalives on one dedicated connection and kill
all the other non keepalive connections
if you determine via that one that the network is bad (or if you have
some other signals about network badness).
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists