Author neologix
Recipients giampaolo.rodola, josiahcarlson, neologix, stutzbach, terry.reedy, vstinner, xdegaye
Date 2011-10-27.17:58:17
SpamBayes Score 3.82827e-12
Marked as misclassified No
Message-id <>
Did you try with the current branches?
AFAICT, this should have been solved by 208a5290fd38 (issue #11265), and I did a quick test with default and it seems to be fixed.
In any case, it's probably a good idea to add this test to test_asyncore.

> So it seems that, on linux, when writing to a closed socket, you get
> an ECONNRESET when there is still data in the socket, and an EPIPE
> otherwise. In the first case the tcp connection ends with a single
> RESET, and in the second case it ends with the sequence FIN-ACK-RESET.

Yes, see RFC1122 section
            A host MAY implement a "half-duplex" TCP close sequence, so
            that an application that has called CLOSE cannot continue to
            read data from the connection.  If such a host issues a
            CLOSE call while received data is still pending in TCP, or
            if new data is received after CLOSE is called, its TCP
            SHOULD send a RST to show that data was lost.
Date User Action Args
2011-10-27 17:58:18neologixsetrecipients: + neologix, terry.reedy, josiahcarlson, vstinner, giampaolo.rodola, stutzbach, xdegaye
2011-10-27 17:58:17neologixsetmessageid: <>
2011-10-27 17:58:17neologixlinkissue5661 messages
2011-10-27 17:58:17neologixcreate