> > Are you thinking of having an explicit heartbeat required for clients to > > send over the network socket? I'm not sure if I agree with circumventing > > the TCP timeout with application logic or not - it seems like just > > giving a delivery error once the socket closes would be a better > > long-term solution. > > I like it neither ... not the client nor the server sending heart beats. > It just adds useless traffic. >
If the server never ends up sending traffic to the client after it was lost, then the server will never notice that the client is dead. IRC uses PING/PONG for this and it works well. -- If you waste your time cooking, you'll miss the next meal. _______________________________________________ jdev mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mailman.jabber.org/listinfo/jdev
