[erlang-questions] Abandoned (ranch) connection processes?

[Roger Lipscombe]

OK. Let me rephrase that:

- {active, once} obviously has something in place to handle data
arriving and closed sockets *in between* calls to {active, once} --
i.e. it'll be {active, false} for a brief interval. I last looked at
this code in 17.x (before the gen_statem refactoring), so I'm not sure
where it lives now.
- does it deal correctly with closed sockets that close before the
*first* call to {active, once}? In other words: can I expect an
ssl_closed message in this case? Is there something special about the
first call?

On 15 February 2018 at 11:15, Dmitry Kolesnikov <dmkolesnikov@REDACTED> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On 15 Feb 2018, at 13.08, Roger Lipscombe <roger@REDACTED> wrote:
>
> The only thing I can think of is that the socket is being closed
> between ranch:accept_ack and Transport:setopts, and Erlang's not
> sending the ssl_closed message. Does this sound likely? How do I deal
> with this?
>
>
> No, it does not sound likely! The bug is either at ranch or your code.
>
> I think you should try to verify the result of each socket operation before
> going further on. I am referring here to your statement: I'm *not* verifying
> the result.
>
>
> Best Regards,
> Dmitry