Re: [jetty-users] Configuring separate keep-alive and idle timeouts to i

[Steven Schlansker <stevenschlansker@xxxxxxxxx>]

> On Sep 6, 2024, at 1:48 PM, Simone Bordet <sbordet@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> On Fri, Sep 6, 2024 at 8:45 PM Steven Schlansker via jetty-users
> <jetty-users@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> I am hoping to avoid increasing the "normal" idle timeout. If a client connects to us, sends one byte, and then loses internet - we want to shut the connection reasonably quickly.
>> I fear if we increase this too much we open ourselves to easily run into denial of service situations.
> 
> For Jetty this is not a problem, and it likely won't even occupy more memory.
> Jetty will wait threadlessly until more bytes will arrive, exactly
> like it would do if no bytes have arrived.
> 
>> However, if there is no active request, and we are just in a keep-alive state, then we would like to configure that timeout to be >10m as required by our cloud provider.
>> 
>> Is it possible with Jetty to have separate short during-request idle timeout, and long no-request keepalive timeout?
>> If not, would this be relatively straightforward to add? Any other suggestions for possible fixes?
> 
> It's currently not supported, and I would just rely on the idle timeout for now.
> Open an issue with the cloud provider -- "cannot be changed" seems
> like "who needs more than 640 KiB of RAM".

Thank you very much Simone - we'll try increasing the idle timeout and hopefully see no ill effects.