The only “safe” way is to have your application send some kind of “keep alive” 
messages from time to time. SO_KEEPALIVE is not really good enough for this. 



> On 15. Feb 2018, at 10:12, Per Steffensen <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> Hi
> 
> I made a client-server system using Netty. The server is running in DMZ and 
> the client in SZ, so only the client can establish the connection. The client 
> establishes the connection and a few messages is exchanged. After than 
> silence, except when the server needs to send something to the client, but it 
> can be hours or days in between. It is working fine, except that the 
> connection is broken, when the server wants to send something to the client, 
> if "enough" time has passed since the last message exchange. It seems to be 2 
> hours that is the limit. The symptoms are that the server tries to send the 
> message, but it cannot do it, it gets "Connection reset by peer". The server 
> cannot reestablish the connection. It is the responsibility of the client to 
> make sure that the connection is up, and it does so by reestablishing in case 
> it notices it is down. The problem (using Netty 4.1.16.Final) is that the 
> client is never notified (via channelInactive) that the connection is down, 
> so it will not reestablish. Net-result is that the server cannot send the 
> message to the client. I have upgraded to 4.1.21.Final, and now it seems 
> (havnt tested thoroughly yet) that the client is actually notified, and it 
> can reestablish. But I would rather that the connections are not being shut 
> down automatically behind the scenes. I have added SO_KEEPALIVE all kinds of 
> places, but it does not seem to change the behavior. Any idea why the 
> inactive connections are automatically shut down? And how to avoid it? I have 
> several connections, and for most of them it is fine that they are shut down 
> if there is no activity, put for a particular connection it would be nice if 
> it is not. So being able to avoiding the automatic shutdown on a 
> per-connection-basis would be optimal.
> 
> Regards, Per Steffensen
> 
> -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "Netty discussions" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
> email to [email protected] 
> <mailto:[email protected]>.
> To view this discussion on the web visit 
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/netty/5fe219c7-34cf-4491-a608-26561357d600%40googlegroups.com
>  
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/netty/5fe219c7-34cf-4491-a608-26561357d600%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout 
> <https://groups.google.com/d/optout>.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Netty discussions" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/netty/A48CF16A-B64E-4299-9DE9-C51DD5C4B332%40googlemail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to