From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu Subject: Re: [9fans] changing close() From: Charles Forsyth Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2005 20:56:37 +0100 In-Reply-To: <20050816080704.1012.qmail@g.galapagos.bx.psu.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Topicbox-Message-UUID: 78eb3a7e-ead0-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 i said that the tcp implementation already had a "hangup" ctl message >>but that seems to assume that RST sent implies no further data can >>be received, which might not be right anyway. but when cooking the duck i remembered that it is right since it's sending RST not FIN. but a "fin" or "shutdown" message could be added if it really is important. i'm curious about the applications, though.