Re: [tcpm] Is this a problem?

[Joe Touch <[e-mail]>]

MURALI BASHYAM wrote:
> We want to limit the timer to the sender's persist state only, any other timeout overloads the semantics of the application,
> and may also cause unnecessary timeouts for the application. In fact there are instances where the application may not
> even have the connection state around to implement the timout correctly, like the tail of a long HTTP response. After sending the tail of the 
> response, the application can close the connection and release its connection memory, during this window only TCP has the 
> connection state. We've done a lot of testing and design  for handling all these cases, and to implement this correctly, 
> we need TCP's involvement.

It still sounds like you have a poorly written application to me; anyone
else?

Joe

_______________________________________________
tcpm mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpm