Enabling ServerAliveInterval by default

Nadav Har'El nyh at math.technion.ac.il
Mon Dec 17 05:56:25 EST 2007

On Sun, Dec 16, 2007, Gert Doering wrote about "Re: Enabling ServerAliveInterval by default":
> On Sat, Dec 15, 2007 at 10:05:00PM +0200, Nadav Har'El wrote:
> > May I ask what is a "sane" NAT timeout? 5 minutes? 30 minutes? 1 hour? 1 day?
> This borders very much on a religious war :-)
> For me, no kind of NAT can ever be considered "sane".
> <religious>
> Working around broken NATs instead of fixing the problem is not The Way To
> Do Things.
> </religious>

Note that I wasn't at all talking specifically about NAT. As I said in my
original post, many types of "stateful" devices, including for example
firewalls and load-balancers cause these problems.

So I'm having a very hard time understand why you see this as a religous war.

I'm having a very hard time believing that I have been the only person who
in the course of the last few years found it harder and harder to keep
non-LAN ssh connections active without being disconnected after a few minutes
of inactivity. I've seen this problem on several combinations of client and
server networks.

> Personally, I have situations where I like ServerAliveInterval, and other
> situations where it isn't needed, and is actually interfering with the
> way I use SSH.  So I need to adapt the defaults either way.

I am curious - how does ServerAliveInterval (again, with a large
ServerAliveCountMax, not the default 3) interfer with the way you use SSH?

Nadav Har'El                        |        Sunday, Dec 16 2007, 8 Tevet 5768
nyh at math.technion.ac.il             |-----------------------------------------
Phone +972-523-790466, ICQ 13349191 |How much wood would a woodchuck chuck if
http://nadav.harel.org.il           |a woodchuck would chuck wood?

More information about the openssh-unix-dev mailing list