RE : RE : [lwip-users] Questions about LwIP KEEPALIVE...

[Frédéric BERNON]

>Even if you only do it in your copy of LWIP, I can see two problems with 
>modifying the LWIP keep-alive timer:
>
>1. It only affects one direction. The other direction will still be sending 
>slow keep-alive packets (unless you have sufficient control over the other 
>end as well).
Sure

>2. If you are running multiple protocols or applications over TCP/IP, a 
>global change in the keep-alive timer may not be suitable for all 
>applications. Even if you are running the same protocol over multiple 
>connections, you might need different keep-alive settings for each 
>connection (e.g. a LAN connection vs a cellular data connection).
Yes, that's why the TCP_KEEPALIVE can change the keepalive timeout for each 
socket. But the default interval seems to long for most of applications. So, I 
think that changing it enable a "faster" reaction for some sockets, and allow 
to set a longer keepalive timeout for others ones...

>I just look the DNP protocol. Is it a very used protocol? Do you an
>overview about it (send me a private email if you can)...
>(replied privately to this part)
Yes, I got your email, thank you...
 




_______________________________________________
lwip-users mailing list
address@hidden http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lwip-users

Frédéric BERNON.vcf
Description: Frédéric BERNON.vcf