https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65886
--- Comment #13 from Archie Cobbs <[email protected]> --- > > Or at least, shouldn't any "timeout" value that is applied to that > > connection be an IDLE timeout rather than an ABSOLUTE timeout (measured > > from when the connection was started)? > > It is an idle timeout. Connections with activity stay up. Yes, you're right. What Vaadin appears to be doing is creating more than one websocket connection, and sending its heartbeat messages on only one of them. Actually that does make sense - the purpose of the Vaadin heartbeat is to let the server know that the client is still alive, not to juice the websocket connection(s). Philosophically, timeouts are appropriate for a request/response world, but the websockets world is a completely different beast. When doing websockets, it really should be left up to the two endpoints to decide if/when the connection has "timed out" and should be torn down; any intervening proxies should not have any timeout (in general) because (in general) they don't have any special knowledge of what the two endpoint applications are doing with their TCP connection. So I'd say that there is another subtle problem here, which is that there really should be two separate configuration variables for configuring (a) the proxy timeout for regular connections and (b) the proxy timeout for websocket connections. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
