[p2p-hackers] Keep Alive and network performance

[Greg Bildson]

Rather than using a dedicated message for keepalives, LimeWire first looks
for message traffic of any kind on a connection.  If there is traffic on the
connection during a time window, then the connection is assumed to still be
alive.    If there has been no natural traffic, we will send a keepalive
ping to it from the hub/ultrapeer.  If there is still no network traffic
coming from the host after a recheck time, we assume the connection is dead
and kill it on the ultrapeer.

We were concerned both about unclean disconnects and connections where the
bandwidth was getting so choked that it was effectively dead.

Thanks
-greg

> -----Original Message-----
> From: p2p-hackers-bounces at zgp.org [mailto:p2p-hackers-bounces at zgp.org]On
> Behalf Of Matthew Gertner
> Sent: Wednesday, February 08, 2006 3:04 PM
> To: Peer-to-peer development.
> Subject: [p2p-hackers] Keep Alive and network performance
>
>
> Hi,
>
> We have a straightforward P2P topology with each peer in the network
> attached to hub. We want to detect efficiently that a peer has
> disconnected from the hub. The obvious way to do this would be to use
> our current TCP connection with a relatively short Keep Alive value (a
> few seconds so we could see the peer's presence updated quickly if they
> don't disconnect cleanly). Does anyone have a feeling for the
> performance implications of this approach if many peers are attached to
> a single hub? Is there another approach that is recommend (such as using
> a custom UDP-based keep alive protocol)?
>
> Regards,
> Matt
> _______________________________________________
> p2p-hackers mailing list
> p2p-hackers at zgp.org
> http://zgp.org/mailman/listinfo/p2p-hackers
> _______________________________________________
> Here is a web page listing P2P Conferences:
> http://www.neurogrid.net/twiki/bin/view/Main/PeerToPeerConferences