Re: UDP timers

From	Grant Edwards <invalid@invalid.invalid>
Newsgroups	comp.arch.embedded
Subject	Re: UDP timers
Date	2014-01-06 16:08 +0000
Organization	PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC
Message-ID	<laekde$qmo$3@reader1.panix.com> (permalink)
References	<la78id$buf$1@speranza.aioe.org> <labuoa$lg2$1@dont-email.me>

Show all headers | View raw

On 2014-01-05, Simon Clubley <clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP> wrote:

> So you don't want TCP, but you want 80% of what TCP provides ? :-)
>
> You know what they say about those who fail to understand TCP... :-)

I suspect what he wants is a reliable datagram service rather than a
reliable byte-stream service (which is what TCP provides).  I also
suspect the datagrams are pretty limited in size.  But, with no real
stated requirments, I'm just guessing.

He could acheive this by layering a datagram protocol on top of TCP.
OTOH, he could layer an ack/timeout/retransmit protocol on top of UDP.
If he's willing to limit is datagram size to 1KB, he could probably
even get away with skipping the IP fragmentation/reassembly stuff.

Without knowing detailed requirements it's impossible to say much
more...

-- 
Grant Edwards               grant.b.edwards        Yow! An INK-LING?  Sure --
                                  at               TAKE one!!  Did you BUY any
                              gmail.com            COMMUNIST UNIFORMS??

Back to comp.arch.embedded | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

UDP timers Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2014-01-03 14:03 -0700
  Re: UDP timers Simon Clubley <clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP> - 2014-01-05 15:46 +0000
    Re: UDP timers Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2014-01-05 14:28 -0700
    Re: UDP timers Grant Edwards <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2014-01-06 16:08 +0000

csiph-web