On Fri, 2012-10-19 at 14:21 -0700, Aliquip wrote: > Isn't InactivityMonitor there to to throw out completely dead connections, > thus connections where no ping's are exachanged? > > Reading http://activemq.apache.org/activemq-inactivitymonitor.html "If > normal activemq traffic has not been sent across the connection during that > period, it expects to receive a KeepAliveInfo message sent by the > InactivityMonitor on the other end of the connection." Now the mqtt protocol > doesnt know of KeepAliveInfo, it however does implement ping messages. > > I stumbled on a similar problem, where it seemed that, despite ping's being > exchanged the connection was closed > (http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/ActiveMQ-5-7-snapshot-and-MQTT-connection-times-out-while-still-connected-to-a-topic-for-receiving-td4656976.html) > >
I just applied a fix to the MQTT code that fixes the startup of the MQTT version of the Inactivity Monitor such that it will honor the keep alive setting sent in the CONNECT frame. Prior to this it was always started early with the default 30 second timeout. If you set the keepAlive to zero it should now not disconnect your client. We should probably look to enhance this in the future such that a client that sets a zero keep alive interval still has some inactivity tracking done so that we can close down dead socket connections after some longer read timeout. See: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AMQ-4117 > > -- > View this message in context: > http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/MQTT-Impossible-to-disable-InactivityMonitor-tp4657945p4657999.html > Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- Tim Bish Sr Software Engineer | RedHat Inc. tim.b...@redhat.com | www.fusesource.com | www.redhat.com skype: tabish121 | twitter: @tabish121 blog: http://timbish.blogspot.com/
