The following reply was made to PR kern/35196; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: Quentin Garnier <cube@cubidou.net>
To: SODA Noriyuki <soda@sra.co.jp>
Cc: perry@piermont.com, gnats-bugs@NetBSD.org
Subject: Re: kern/35196: sockets should die if addresses vanish
Date: Thu, 7 Dec 2006 09:05:24 +0100

 --+5X6wed+orjucm7J
 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
 Content-Disposition: inline
 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
 
 On Thu, Dec 07, 2006 at 11:34:35AM +0900, SODA Noriyuki wrote:
 > >>>>> On Thu,  7 Dec 2006 02:25:01 +0000 (UTC), perry@piermont.com said:
 >=20
 > > The addresses bound to said interface will often go away, to be
 > > replaced by new ones (or none at all). However, even after they go
 > > away, TCP connections will continue to live for quite some time,
 > > eventually timing out, going into time wait, etc.
 >=20
 > > This is quite clearly silly.
 >=20
 > It is not so silly, acutally.
 > Think about unstable PPP link which nearly always assigns same IP
 > address for each host.
 
 And not necessarily unstable;  not so long ago most ADSL ISPs in France
 used to disconnect people after 24h.  It was a pain for Windows users,
 that OS being one that does what Perry wants.
 
 --=20
 Quentin Garnier - cube@cubidou.net - cube@NetBSD.org
 "You could have made it, spitting out benchmarks
 Owe it to yourself not to fail"
 Amplifico, Spitting Out Benchmarks, Hometakes Vol. 2, 2005.
 
 --+5X6wed+orjucm7J
 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
 Content-Disposition: inline
 
 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
 Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (NetBSD)
 
 iQEVAwUBRXfLRNgoQloHrPnoAQLOxQf/bi3jsPBulH/DXp+TCIVjCWki60V0QLbq
 ba1B6RV7IpHvvS0v9EiuFrUc7BJAQwPI3yAmYi/XnO7WP90MSQhDj6J1xfXtbUne
 cVZs+owhKhOn+N3TAtv330ZyiUJd1x/DnGpinRKcai/Y2bOXkCb0Sv83Fqz4OoIZ
 0KaV9l9uYckWUwERucEdT0iHyuHJS8Nc6kUckWcAwSQsT5l+An1WvScmfNm0JFej
 b6dg4Cv41wATTx+lZDOC5rj1Co6lIeJz8UrP0pMU8Rya2g9k80gaBWPMhwM4Wydh
 kPdH5Asj9SOh6L8Jij5RZoplv3a9kVsOhtcm0wIJheUL3P52OETkrQ==
 =9T4u
 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
 
 --+5X6wed+orjucm7J--