Seperate keepalive 0 from socket settimeout #876
Open
cjavad wants to merge 1 commit into
Open
Conversation
…epalive 0 to be set Signed-off-by: Javad Asgari Shafique <me@javad.sh>
|
What is the status on this PR ? Merging it would help me a ton ! |
Closed
Author
|
Hi @Sporarum personally we ended up just using a keepalive value that was consistent with the rest of our system instead of disabling this feature, previously we maintained a runtime patch like this https://gist.github.com/cjavad/b804b4fada7ff0e18cf77d43b7f731dd, which can be adapted to also patch out websockets etc. But i would imagine @'ing a maintainer could get this moving otherwise. |
|
In our case, we want a long keepalive, but a short connection timeout, which does not seem possible because of this bug |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
In certain conditions (MQTT over SSL, and also some websockets stuff) _keepalive is used as a socket timeout, which is all good until used with
0, which triggers as #42 describes it "an infinite loop" preventing any connection from being established. Originally in our testing only the SSL code path was triggered, and referring an older change (#578) _connect_timeout can be used as an alternative, which also semantically makes sense.I noticed the same value was used on another socket for websocket transports, and with some quick testing both cases fail with keepalive 0:
Using test.mosquitto.org with websockets:
And over SSL:
Both TLS and WebSocket rely on initial communication beyond the socket connection to establish a connection which makes a timeout of 0 impossible to respect for either protocol.
Using a seperate value which is non-zero seems to make more sense, although the meaning of
keepalivefits thesettimeoutfunctionality better, so perhaps only calling it for values greater than 0?