[ENBD] 2.4.32

[Peter T. Breuer]

"Also sprach Peter T. Breuer:"
> Yadda yadda yadda. That was quite a lot! All of them seem to be mostly
> ok, but it seems to be as you described, that under memory pressure
> the server side cannot respond quickly enough to a keepalive ping. I
> almost wonder if keeping -e would be right, and simply extend the
> timeout! How about "-p 60" at the client side? Surely the server
> should be able to respond to a ping in under 60s?

And I wonder if what I could do is "only error requests when there is
no daemon at all alive to take them, otherwise roll them back", when 
-e is set. 

I think that would cover the case of one daemon dropping out of line.

And it would remain sensitive to network outages, as all daemons would
die off in that case. Yerrrrrrs  .... hang on ....

Peter