From: C H Forsyth <forsyth@vitanuova.com>
To: 9fans@9fans.net
Subject: Re: [9fans] telnet vs. godaddy whois
Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2008 23:20:54 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <92376436a8f5469475e226c172fc9eab@vitanuova.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <57a21f730804161443t2de4a0f3r33ea6aa875f462d1@mail.gmail.com>
>i wonder if godaddy's tcp does not reset in that case - anyone care to verify?
i cannot think of a sensible reason it should do that: it seems more work for the receiver,
to run an extra timer to time the probes. even when the probes are based on the retransmission
timer they could easily occur on the order of tens or hundreds of microseconds on some networks.
you don't want something as big as 5 seconds because the window-opening packet might
have been zapped, and who wants 5 second delays because of that?
it's not for nothing that rfc793 and rfc1122 say what they do.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-04-16 22:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 51+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-04-15 17:16 erik quanstrom
2008-04-16 13:31 ` Russ Cox
2008-04-16 13:46 ` Charles Forsyth
2008-04-16 16:52 ` Michaelian Ennis
2008-04-16 18:36 ` erik quanstrom
2008-04-16 19:04 ` ron minnich
2008-04-16 19:48 ` Bakul Shah
2008-04-16 20:25 ` Tim Wiess
2008-04-16 20:49 ` Charles Forsyth
2008-04-16 21:43 ` Taj Khattra
2008-04-16 22:00 ` John Barham
2008-04-16 22:20 ` C H Forsyth [this message]
2008-04-16 23:26 ` Bakul Shah
2008-04-17 0:04 ` Charles Forsyth
2008-04-17 8:18 ` Charles Forsyth
2008-04-17 18:41 ` Bakul Shah
2008-04-17 19:29 ` erik quanstrom
2008-04-17 20:59 ` Tim Wiess
2008-04-17 21:19 ` Charles Forsyth
2008-04-17 21:23 ` Tim Wiess
2008-04-17 21:56 ` Charles Forsyth
2008-04-17 22:06 ` Charles Forsyth
2008-04-17 22:43 ` Tim Wiess
2008-04-17 23:02 ` Charles Forsyth
2008-04-17 23:09 ` Charles Forsyth
2008-04-21 14:56 ` erik quanstrom
2008-04-21 15:24 ` Charles Forsyth
2008-04-21 19:37 ` erik quanstrom
2008-04-21 20:20 ` Charles Forsyth
2008-04-21 19:28 ` Bakul Shah
2008-04-21 20:19 ` Charles Forsyth
2008-04-21 21:06 ` Bakul Shah
2008-04-21 21:24 ` Charles Forsyth
2008-04-21 21:40 ` Wes Kussmaul
2008-04-21 21:45 ` erik quanstrom
2008-04-21 22:04 ` Wes Kussmaul
2008-04-21 21:57 ` Charles Forsyth
2008-04-21 22:07 ` Bakul Shah
2008-04-21 23:12 ` Charles Forsyth
2008-04-21 20:19 ` Charles Forsyth
2008-04-21 21:49 ` erik quanstrom
2008-04-21 22:42 ` Bakul Shah
2008-04-17 21:42 ` Bakul Shah
2008-04-17 21:49 ` Charles Forsyth
2008-04-17 21:49 ` erik quanstrom
2008-04-17 22:15 ` Charles Forsyth
2008-04-17 22:19 ` erik quanstrom
2008-04-17 22:48 ` Charles Forsyth
2008-04-17 22:55 ` Tim Wiess
2008-04-17 23:08 ` Charles Forsyth
2008-04-17 22:14 ` Bakul Shah
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=92376436a8f5469475e226c172fc9eab@vitanuova.com \
--to=forsyth@vitanuova.com \
--cc=9fans@9fans.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).