diff -r 9d7ce34704c8 -r b564fb5fd78b datacommsserver/esockserver/test/TE_Socket/SocketTestSection1.cpp
--- a/datacommsserver/esockserver/test/TE_Socket/SocketTestSection1.cpp	Tue Aug 31 16:25:36 2010 +0300
+++ b/datacommsserver/esockserver/test/TE_Socket/SocketTestSection1.cpp	Wed Sep 01 12:35:48 2010 +0100
@@ -384,21 +384,15 @@
 		{
 		sockNum--;
 		}
-	Logger().WriteFormat(_L("Created %d sockets"), sockNum);
-	
-	// Not sure what use it is to test whether we can open at least as many sockets as previously.
-	// We can't assume that once we've freed all the sockets first time around that the ESock heap will
-	// go back exactly to where it was before - this makes assumptions about the ESock algorithms.  Why
-	// wouldn't ESock legitimately cache objects, for example?
-	//TESTL(sockNum >= sockCount1);
+	Logger().WriteFormat(_L("Created %d sockets, expected at least %d sockets"), sockNum, sockCount1);
+	TESTL(sockNum >= sockCount1);
 
-	//
-	// NOTE:
-	// We do *not* free up the sockets but just close the session.  This is to exercise the subsession
-	// cleanup behaviour in ESock with a large number of sockets.  We test that this cleanup operation
-	// does not overflow the transport queue, as each subsession cleanup results in a message being sent.
-	//
-	
+	Logger().WriteFormat(_L("Freeing sockets in creation order"));
+	for (i=0; i<sockNum; i++)
+		{
+		socks[i].Close();
+		}
+
 #endif	// (_DEBUG) }
 
 	CleanupStack::PopAndDestroy(socks);