On 8 Jul 2003 at 11:10, Viktor Lazlo boldly uttered: 

> On Thu, 3 Jul 2003, Philip J. Koenig wrote:
> > One of those firewalls is quite flexible about protocol state
> > timeouts, I can set this on a service-by-service basis. (ie I could
> > increase it for SSH and no other service)
> >
> > Unfortunately the firewall on the other side isn't so accommodating.
> > It has a single timeout setting that affects all traffic that
> > traverses the firewall, and I'd rather not increase that too high.
> If there is no option then run a low-bandwidth application in the
> background to keep the connection alive, or script something to generate
> some activity at frequent enough intervals to do so.

Well that goes without saying, but the idea was whether the protocol 
itself contained a "keepalive" function.  It's still a pain to have 
to go through that just so a connection will not die after 5 mins.

I would think this is a common enough issue to justify an enhancement 
request to the open-ssh people.

Philip J. Koenig                                       
Electric Kahuna Systems -- Computers & Communications for 
the New Millenium

[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"

Reply via email to