[standards-jig] JEP 65 - Bytestreams

Justin Karneges justin-jdev at affinix.com
Fri Dec 20 01:03:22 UTC 2002

On Thursday 19 December 2002 04:24 pm, Ben Schumacher wrote:
> Richard Dobson wrote:
> | Also to the people who say you have to wait for a TCP timeout before
> | trying the next step (typically 60 seconds) why not implement a manual
> | timer of say 10-20 seconds, if a connection is not established after
> | that kind of a period of time IMO it probably wont, most connections
> | should happen pretty quickly.
> I believe Dizzy already suggest this, but I agree completely. There is
> no reason that a connection that is going to work should take longer
> than 10-20 seconds. And if it would work after that longer period, then
> its likely that there are dropped packets, or other problems which would
> ultimately lead to a useless connection anyhow.

I don't think cutting the connection short is a good idea.  You might lose a 
possible connection due to a temporary network problem.  Let's consider the 
reverse scenario:  what if you had a DTCP implementation where the initiator 
would wait 10-20 seconds before trying to connect?  This is more ideal, as 
you wouldn't cut any connections short, and you spend the same in bandwidth.

But these are all implementation specifics.


More information about the Standards mailing list