From: Rick Jones <rick.jones2@hp•com>
To: Jamie Gloudon <jamie.gloudon@gmail•com>
Cc: Eric Dumazet <erdnetdev@gmail•com>, netdev@vger•kernel.org
Subject: Re: Is keepalive behaving as expected in 3.7.0+/net-next?
Date: Sun, 30 Dec 2012 12:51:47 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <50E0A963.6080900@hp.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <50df48f4.0e5b650a.36fa.1452@mx.google.com>
> Make a lot of sense. However, I got the impression from Rick that
> having tcp_keepalive_intvl > tcp_keepalive_time behaved correctly in
> older versions of the kernel.
I seek to make no assertions about the behaviour of older kernels. I
was just going off the ip-sysctl.txt wording I was looking to clean-up.
rick
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-12-30 20:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-12-21 22:05 Is keepalive behaving as expected in 3.7.0+/net-next? Rick Jones
2012-12-27 21:54 ` Eric Dumazet
2012-12-29 19:47 ` Jamie Gloudon
2012-12-30 20:51 ` Rick Jones [this message]
2012-12-31 1:50 ` Jamie Gloudon
2013-01-03 20:13 ` Rick Jones
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=50E0A963.6080900@hp.com \
--to=rick.jones2@hp$(echo .)com \
--cc=erdnetdev@gmail$(echo .)com \
--cc=jamie.gloudon@gmail$(echo .)com \
--cc=netdev@vger$(echo .)kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
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