Re: [tcpm] poll for adoption of draft-ananth-persist-02

Mark Allman <mallman@icir.org> Thu, 01 April 2010 19:53 UTC

Return-Path: <mallman@icir.org>
X-Original-To: tcpm@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tcpm@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E83A93A6847 for <tcpm@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 1 Apr 2010 12:53:09 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.675
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.675 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.794, BAYES_00=-2.599, DNS_FROM_OPENWHOIS=1.13, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 1tQE+Pwz+nxI for <tcpm@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 1 Apr 2010 12:53:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from fruitcake.ICSI.Berkeley.EDU (fruitcake.ICSI.Berkeley.EDU [192.150.186.11]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 591563A6836 for <tcpm@ietf.org>; Thu, 1 Apr 2010 12:53:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lawyers.icir.org (jack.ICSI.Berkeley.EDU [192.150.186.73]) by fruitcake.ICSI.Berkeley.EDU (8.12.11.20060614/8.12.11) with ESMTP id o31JrKwg009993; Thu, 1 Apr 2010 12:53:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lawyers.icir.org (www.obdev.at [127.0.0.1]) by lawyers.icir.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 65DE6C97755; Thu, 1 Apr 2010 15:53:20 -0400 (EDT)
To: Murali Bashyam <MBashyam@ocarinanetworks.com>
From: Mark Allman <mallman@icir.org>
In-Reply-To: <EC7B72027914A242B991C029F5F213CF3EBF3BAB5B@exchsvr01.ocarina.local>
Organization: International Computer Science Institute (ICSI)
Song-of-the-Day: The Joker
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="--------ma63920-1"; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Date: Thu, 01 Apr 2010 15:53:20 -0400
Sender: mallman@icir.org
Message-Id: <20100401195320.65DE6C97755@lawyers.icir.org>
Cc: "tcpm@ietf.org" <tcpm@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [tcpm] poll for adoption of draft-ananth-persist-02
X-BeenThere: tcpm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
Reply-To: mallman@icir.org
List-Id: TCP Maintenance and Minor Extensions Working Group <tcpm.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpm>, <mailto:tcpm-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/tcpm>
List-Post: <mailto:tcpm@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tcpm-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpm>, <mailto:tcpm-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 01 Apr 2010 19:53:10 -0000

> There are other aspects too, it's also important for the application
> to control the duration that the connection spends in persist state,
> this is planned to be accomplished via a socket option. 

Why?

I mean, sure, an app may want to not let a connection hang around
forever.  But, can't it just ABORT whenever it wants?

allman