activemq-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Christian Posta (JIRA)" <>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (AMQ-4123) Improve MQTT Inactivity Monitoring
Date Tue, 23 Oct 2012 20:09:12 GMT


Christian Posta commented on AMQ-4123:

Yah, I hear ya. Im on the fence now too. If we use the KeepAliveInfo, then it ties the PINGREQ/RESP
to the InactivityMonitor. As it is right now, when the MQTTProtocolConverter sees a PINGREQ,
it responds right away with a PINGRESP regardless of whether there is an InactivityMonitor

On the other hand, the InactivityMonitor is the heart-beating on the server side and the PINGREQ/RESP
is the contract. My instincts say to make the PINGREQ/RESP explicit in the implementation.

idk yet. i'll run my proposed changes by you before I commit.
> Improve MQTT Inactivity Monitoring
> ----------------------------------
>                 Key: AMQ-4123
>                 URL:
>             Project: ActiveMQ
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: MQTT, Transport
>    Affects Versions: 5.7.0
>            Reporter: Christian Posta
>            Priority: Minor
>             Fix For: 5.8.0
> * Keep Alive should be 1.5 * the keep alive value specified by client (the grace period
described in spec:
> * MQTTInactivityMonitor checking for KeepAliveInfo in the onCommand, but it can never
get a KeepAliveInfo as it is
> * What to do when user explicitly turns Inactivity Monitor off?
> * Should there be defaults to close potentially dead connections?

This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators
For more information on JIRA, see:

View raw message