Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2014 21:31:15 -0400 From: Benjamin Kaduk <bjkfbsd@gmail.com> To: Mateusz Guzik <mjguzik@gmail.com> Cc: Konstantin Belousov <kostikbel@gmail.com>, freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: current fd allocation idiom Message-ID: <CAJ5_RoADBqeYL2=XzBeZ6d5fPVqdwkOFoe==AGOZmezBTK%2B5mw@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20140812233617.GA17869@dft-labs.eu> References: <20140717235538.GA15714@dft-labs.eu> <20140718155959.GN93733@kib.kiev.ua> <20140718191928.GB7179@dft-labs.eu> <201408111124.52064.jhb@freebsd.org> <20140812233617.GA17869@dft-labs.eu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 7:36 PM, Mateusz Guzik <mjguzik@gmail.com> wrote: > I would expect soabort to result in a timeout/reset as opposed to regular > connection close. > > Comments around soabort suggest it should not be used as a replacement > for close, but maybe this is largely because of what the other end will > see. That will need to be investigated. > > I added some text regarding soabort to socket.9 in r266962 -- does that help clarify the situation? -Ben
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAJ5_RoADBqeYL2=XzBeZ6d5fPVqdwkOFoe==AGOZmezBTK%2B5mw>