httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jim Jagielski <>
Subject Re: more lingering_close... (tcpdump analysis)
Date Mon, 10 Feb 1997 00:05:20 GMT
Ben Laurie wrote:
> Jim Jagielski wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > Let's assume that someone has set Apache up for 5 keepalives.
> > Let's also assume that a client is setup to attempt 100 keepalives.
> > As I understand it, the way Apache currently works is that after
> > the 5 it responds to, it closes it's output and listens to the next
> > 95 requests simply to ignore them, at which point it fully closes
> > the socket. It does this to guarantee that it not send the final
> > fin/ack until it's sure the client is ready for it.
> No. It does this to ensure that the client sees the response that caused it to
> close the connection. Or else it might just go round again, and so on forever.
> But this may not be the only way to solve the problem. This is important,

My problem is using short-handed notation... by saying "the client
is ready for it" I mean that the client actually is able to see and
respond to the fact that the link is closing. If the client wasn't
"ready", it could rec the RST before knowing why. If "ready", then
the client is aware of any error message sent and can expect or
understand why the socket is closed/closing.

      Jim Jagielski            |       jaguNET Access Services           |
                  "Not the Craw... the CRAW!"

View raw message