Gerald Villemure wrote:
Timo Sirainen wrote:
TCP keepalives get sent so rarely that they don't keep NATed connections
alive. (Linux's tcp(7) says the first one is sent after 2h of idling)
Its the same for windows systems, 2 hours.
You may find that some GPRS implementations drop idle conne
Timo Sirainen wrote:
TCP keepalives get sent so rarely that they don't keep NATed connections
alive. (Linux's tcp(7) says the first one is sent after 2h of idling)
Its the same for windows systems, 2 hours.
All routers SHOULD keep the NAT connections open for at least that long.
But its not
On Thu, 2007-08-16 at 02:22 +0200, Fredrik Tolf wrote:
> I just recently discovered the IMAP IDLE command and tried it out with
> my Dovecot server. It seems to work fine and all, but it seems to be
> using quite a deal of bandwidth, because of the "* OK Still here"
> messages sent by the server at
On Thu, 2007-08-16 at 08:59 +0200, Steffen Kaiser wrote:
> On Thu, 16 Aug 2007, Fredrik Tolf wrote:
>
> > using quite a deal of bandwidth, because of the "* OK Still here"
>
> They are very essential for the COPY command, when I tested large
> mailboxes last. So I suggest to _not_ remove them li
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Thu, 16 Aug 2007, Fredrik Tolf wrote:
using quite a deal of bandwidth, because of the "* OK Still here"
They are very essential for the COPY command, when I tested large
mailboxes last. So I suggest to _not_ remove them lightheadedly.
The prob
Hi list,
I just recently discovered the IMAP IDLE command and tried it out with
my Dovecot server. It seems to work fine and all, but it seems to be
using quite a deal of bandwidth, because of the "* OK Still here"
messages sent by the server at two minute intervals. I would argue that
is a bit of
