Re: [tcpm] poll for adoption of draft-ananth-persist-02 (Christos Zoulas) Wed, 14 April 2010 14:37 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 193AB3A67BD for <>; Wed, 14 Apr 2010 07:37:24 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.185
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.185 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_40=-0.185]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id D2NManUwxRjP for <>; Wed, 14 Apr 2010 07:37:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id B4CA33A6851 for <>; Wed, 14 Apr 2010 07:37:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by (Postfix, from userid 10080) id 00DE956425; Wed, 14 Apr 2010 10:37:12 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2010 10:37:12 -0400
In-Reply-To: <> from "Eddy, Wesley M. (GRC-MS00)[ASRC AEROSPACE CORP]" (Apr 14, 8:21am)
Organization: Astron Software
X-Mailer: Mail User's Shell (7.2.6 beta(4.pl1)+dynamic 20000103)
To: "Eddy, Wesley M. (GRC-MS00)[ASRC AEROSPACE CORP]" <>, "" <>
Message-Id: <>
Subject: Re: [tcpm] poll for adoption of draft-ananth-persist-02
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: TCP Maintenance and Minor Extensions Working Group <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2010 14:37:24 -0000

On Apr 14,  8:21am, ("Eddy, Wesley M. (GRC-MS00)[ASRC AEROSPACE CORP]") wrote:
-- Subject: Re: [tcpm] poll for adoption of draft-ananth-persist-02

| After reviewing this mailing list thread and the IETF 77
| discussion, David and I think there's support to make
| this a working group document.
| As we see it, the path to take toward publication is:
| 1) authors submit a draft-ietf-tcpm version of the document
| 2) authors need to come to closure with several people who
|    disagree with specification of a new socket option; this
|    seems to be the main point of contention
| 3) issue a WGLC once consensus is determined for the socket
|    option issue

- Shouldn't the variable be called something like SO_PERSISTTIMEO to follow
  suit with existing options and be in the proper namespace?
- Shouldn't the type of the persist_timeout_value be mentioned (again
  presumably either int or struct timeval, again to follow convention)
  as well if "int" is chosen the units (seconds)?
- There should also be a getsockopt(2) for this (for symmetry).
- Are there any existing implementations for this, and if so do they use
  one of the existing timers, or does this need a new one?