1 |
Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@×××××.com> writes: |
2 |
|
3 |
> On Friday 12 February 2010 09:44:01 Graham Murray wrote: |
4 |
>> Volker Armin Hemmann <volkerarmin@××××××××××.com> writes: |
5 |
>> > so how do you propose that a network connection manager tells a broweser |
6 |
>> > or mail app that they are offline? |
7 |
>> |
8 |
>> Why does the app need to know? Browsers normally have an online/offline |
9 |
>> menu selection and if you try to browse to a site when your network is |
10 |
>> offline then the browser will generate the appropriate error message. In |
11 |
>> any case, these notifications are only really of use on a single-homed |
12 |
>> non LAN connected system. On an office LAN, you may well be able to |
13 |
>> still access your mail server but a problem means that you cannot access |
14 |
>> any web sites. |
15 |
> |
16 |
> A network connection manager tells apps when the machine's interface goes |
17 |
> down, not when the gateway is no longer available. |
18 |
> |
19 |
> You have these two things conflated. |
20 |
|
21 |
Which still does not explain why the applications need to know when a |
22 |
network interface goes down but does not need to know when (for example) |
23 |
the ADSL connection (via an external router) to the 'outside world' goes |
24 |
down[1]. As far as both the application and the user are concerned the |
25 |
effect is exactly the same in both cases - the application is |
26 |
offline. If it is considered important to inform the application of one, |
27 |
then it should be equally important to inform the application of the |
28 |
other. If a network interface goes offline then the user needs to know, |
29 |
so as to take corrective action, but I do not think that telling the web |
30 |
browser and mail applications is the correct way of informing the user. |
31 |
|
32 |
[1] Which in my experience, while not a frequent occurrence, happens |
33 |
far more frequently than the network interface going down. |