I'm curious as to how this would not be considered disconnected - can I ask why you don't want it actually disconnected? It seems to me that you can't really physically stop the other end sending something without seriously violating the inner workings of TCP/IP.
Well, don't ask me about it! The other end seems to be running a server (they don't release much information about it) which needs to be idle in certain situations, but at the same time we need it to be re-enabled pretty fast, and redialing and going through the handshake stages again is not an option.
I basically told them to fix the problem on their side, but I wanted to have a clean conscious by knowing that this is not *easily* doable.
Hmmm... I wonder if you can do something like XonXoff over TCP/IP and send the Xoff char? The other end would then pause, theoretically...
I'm not really aware of what Xon/Xoff exactly are. Are they spacial codes sent on serial channels signaling the other end to start/stop the data transmission?
If that is so, TCP/IP doesn't have anything like that to my knowledge. In fact, it doesn't have a 100% exact way of disconnecting (it can be proved theoretically that it's impossible.)
-- Ehsan Akhgari Farda Technology <http://www.farda-tech.com/>
If C gives you enough rope to hang yourself, C++ gives you enough rope to bind and gag your neighborhood, rig the sails on a small ship, and still have enough rope left over to hang yourself from the yardarm.
_______________________________________________ msvc mailing list [email protected] See http://beginthread.com/mailman/listinfo/msvc_beginthread.com for subscription changes, and list archive.
