Jamie Lokier wrote:

>> I think it must be an option, since this is not guaranteed by RFC959
>> to be properly processed by all servers.

> Actually it is. From RFC959:

Right: the NOOP command must be supported. But the handling of the
control connection while a data transfer is active is not well defined:
this is the real potential problem. Light servers have the "permission"
to ignore the control connection while transfering data. In that case,
the attention mechanism defined in RFC959 seems a bit hazardous...

> SO_KEEPALIVE isn't available on all platforms with TCP, though.

Agreed, although most of them support it. Anyway, it should be an option
too.
Received on 2007-11-05