W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > October to December 2012

Re: Lingering Close

From: Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>
Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2012 21:22:40 +0100
To: Zhong Yu <zhong.j.yu@gmail.com>
Cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <20121128202240.GH7227@1wt.eu>
On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 01:24:15PM -0600, Zhong Yu wrote:
> Thanks Willy, I think I get what you mean by now. FIN should be
> initiated by server to avoid the TIME_WAIT problem. Therefore the
> half-close step is important.

exactly.

> The current text makes perfect sense to me now.

With this in mind, do you think that something in the text should be
updated for future readers ?

> Unfortunately, this lingering close process cannot be implemented on
> top of some APIs; these APIs don't do transparent lingering close upon
> close() either. But it is their fault, not the spec's.

Indeed. However the fallback to full close with the kernel's lingering is
still working in practice. Just not perfectly reliable.

Regards,
Willy
Received on Wednesday, 28 November 2012 20:23:07 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 28 November 2012 20:23:10 GMT