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

Fernando Gont <fernando@gont.com.ar> Thu, 08 April 2010 03:50 UTC

Return-Path: <fernando@gont.com.ar>
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 F2E7F3A68D1 for <tcpm@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 7 Apr 2010 20:50:40 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.299
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.299 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.300, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
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 aLHfkyoHPPz4 for <tcpm@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 7 Apr 2010 20:50:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp1.xmundo.net (smtp1.xmundo.net [201.216.232.80]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5DD9D3A6827 for <tcpm@ietf.org>; Wed, 7 Apr 2010 20:50:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from venus.xmundo.net (venus.xmundo.net [201.216.232.56]) by smtp1.xmundo.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5D9E26B687F; Thu, 8 Apr 2010 00:50:39 -0300 (ART)
Received: from [192.168.0.102] (129-130-17-190.fibertel.com.ar [190.17.130.129]) (authenticated bits=0) by venus.xmundo.net (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o383oUmJ024636; Thu, 8 Apr 2010 00:50:31 -0300
Message-ID: <4BBD5286.4030003@gont.com.ar>
Date: Thu, 08 Apr 2010 00:50:30 -0300
From: Fernando Gont <fernando@gont.com.ar>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.24 (Windows/20100228)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: mallman@icir.org
References: <20100408025756.85D4ED2D489@lawyers.icir.org>
In-Reply-To: <20100408025756.85D4ED2D489@lawyers.icir.org>
X-Enigmail-Version: 0.96.0
OpenPGP: id=D076FFF1
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH authentication, not delayed by milter-greylist-3.0 (venus.xmundo.net [201.216.232.56]); Thu, 08 Apr 2010 00:50:38 -0300 (ART)
Cc: "tcpm@ietf.org" <tcpm@ietf.org>, Murali Bashyam <MBashyam@ocarinanetworks.com>, Joe Touch <touch@isi.edu>
Subject: Re: [tcpm] poll for adoption of draft-ananth-persist-02
X-BeenThere: tcpm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
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, 08 Apr 2010 03:50:41 -0000

Mark Allman wrote:

>>> Linux has abort via: CLOSE after SO_LINGER(l_onoff=nonzero, l_linger=0)
>> I agree with Joe here.
> 
> Yep.  We should clarify and be done with it.  The hooks to let the app
> do something smart if it cares enough to do so are already either there
> or specified.

FWIW, this SO_LINGER option predates Linux. It was already covered in
Stevens' UNP series, which didn't cover Linux (IIRC).

IMO, we don't need RFC 1122 (or whatever) to allow us to abort (i.e.,
ABORT()) connections (despite the reason). The ABORT procedure was
already defined in RFC 793, and there were no contraints at all wrt
*when* a TCP user is allowed to call it.

Thanks,
-- 
Fernando Gont
e-mail: fernando@gont.com.ar || fgont@acm.org
PGP Fingerprint: 7809 84F5 322E 45C7 F1C9 3945 96EE A9EF D076 FFF1