TCP Sockets in C: Does the recv() function trigger sending the ACK?

Question

Im working with TCP Sockets in C but yet dont really understand "how far" the delivery of data is ensured.

My main problem is that in my case the server sometimes sends a message to the client and expects an answer shortly after. If the client doesnt answer in time, the server closes the connection. When reading through the manpages of the recv() function in C, I found the MSG_PEEK Flag which lets me look/peek into the Stream without actually reading the data.

But does the server even care if I read from the stream at all?

Lets say the server "pushes" a series of messages into the stream and a Client should receive them. As long as the Client doesnt call recv() those messages will stay in the Stream right? I know about ACK messages being send when receiving data, but is ACK sent when i call the recv() function or is the ACK already sent when the messsage successfully reached its destination and could (emphasising could) be received by the client if it choses to call recv()?

My hope is to trick the server into thinking the message wasnt completely send yet, because the client has not called recv() yet. Therefore the Client could already evaluate the message by using the MSG_PEEK flag and ensure it always answers in time. Of course I know the timout thing with my server depends on the implementation. My question basically is, if PEEKING lets the server think the message hasnt reached it destination yet or if the server wont even care and when ACK is sent when using recv().

I read the manpages on recv() and wiki on TCP but couldnt really figure out how recv() takes part in the process. I found some similar questions on SO but no answer to my question.

Answer 1

TL;DR

Does the recv() function trigger sending the ACK?

No, not on any regular OS. Possibly on an embedded platform with an inefficient.network stack. But it's almost certainly the wrong problem anyway.

---

Your question about finessing the details of ACK delivery is a whole can of worms. It's an implemention detail, which means it is highly platform-specific. For example, you may be able to modify the delayed ACK timer on some TCP stacks, but that might be a global kernel parameter if it even exists.

However, it's all irrelevant to your actual question. There's almost no chance the server is looking at when the packet was received, because it would need it's own TCP stack to even guess that, and it still wouldn't be reliable (TCP retrans can keep backing off and retrying for minutes ). The server is looking at when it sent the data, and you can't affect that.

The closest you could get is if the server uses blocking writes and is single-threaded and you fill the receive window with un-acked data. But that will probably delay the server noticing you're late rather than actually deceiving it.

Just make your processing fast enough to avoid a timeout instead of trying to lie with TCP.