On 24/08/05 23:44 -0700, Trevor Warren wrote:
Morning Sir,
--- Devdas Bhagat devdas@dvb.homelinux.org wrote:
Those who do not understand TCP...
[snip]
Thanks Devdas for having enlightened us.
If you need reliability, use TCP. If you need performance, and can sacrifice reliability, use UDP. If you want both, buy more bandwidth, and sign a SLA with your provider for the reliability.
[snip]
Devdas, the issue is not about SLA's not about B/W and not about reliability atleast for now. We are discussing on getting the max throput thro either TCP-UDP. Post having achieved the same reliability-scalability-redundancy-performance-cpu consumption need to be looked into. We are in a phase where these protocols are being stressed on various OS stacks.
If you need reliability and choose UDP because it is nominally faster, you will end up reimplementing TCP on top of UDP. Plenty of people have made this mistake, and you should learn from them. Reinventing the wheel is not a good thing in software, or in computer science.
I assume you are smart enough to have gorged enough of TCP/IP through your career. You may not necessarily want to help but please understand the objective before you make such comments. Atleast i do feel you came across in an uncouth manner.
I apologise if I appeared rude, there was no intention to be. The rules above are common protocol design rules, and should be followed.
Devdas Bhagat