From: grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se   
      
   On Thu, 2010-04-22, Barry Margolin wrote:   
   > In article ,   
   >  Jorgen Grahn  wrote:   
   >   
   >> On Tue, 2010-04-20, Singh wrote:   
   >> > Hi,   
   >> > I am developing a daemon which will monitor an agent running on a   
   >> > linux system. A client from some other host connects to the agent and   
   >> > performs some work, once the client disconnects i need to stop that   
   >> > agent.   
   >>   
   >> It would be much, much better if the agent could stop itself. Or be   
   >> implemented as an inetd service, so it happens automatically[1].   
   >>   
   >> The way the design looks now ...   
   >>   
   >> > for that i need to get the information in the daemon when the   
   >> > client's connection close to the agent so that i can proceed to stop   
   >> > the agent from the daemon running.   
   >>   
   >> ... it's not really a networking question in the normal sense. It's   
   >> a Linux process monitoring question.   
   >>   
   >> /Jorgen   
   >>   
   >> [1] I guess inetd services still need to implement their own timeouts   
   >>     though.  I'm not 100% sure about that, and too lazy to RTFM.   
   >   
   > Inetd uses a completely different model.  It starts a new instance of   
   > the server for each connection, there's no single agent that needs to be   
   > stopped.   
      
   Yes. My concern was that if the peer host disappears, he may need   
   timeouts in the agent to avoid TCP connections (and thus agenty   
   processes) hanging for a long time.  I have a feeling such problems   
   is the reason he wants something monitoring the agent ...   
      
   /Jorgen   
      
   --   
     // Jorgen Grahn    O  o   .   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)