I was think considering the choice of network protocol for a scenario server I am considering (see old posts for more details), I am not sure if "fire it and hope for the best" is the best system for a scenario server.
I would have suggested broadcasting but I found a higher probability of network storms in prior implementations. Thoughts? ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jonathan Polley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "FlightGear developers discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, August 03, 2003 10:09 PM Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] Networking > Paul, > > I have used the UDP interface for the remote display, but I believe that it can use either. I realy prefer UDP since it has let network overhead, and if a packet gets lost you won't be held up waiting for the retransmission. That said, if you are on a noisy network you may have to use TCP. > > Jonathan Polley > > On Sunday, August 03, 2003, at 04:06PM, Paul Morriss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >Hi all, > > Does flightgear use UDP (connection-less) or connect > >oriented in the networking code? > > > >Also do you feel that UDP is good enough for network > >gaming. > > > >Thanks > > > > > > > > Of COURSE they can do that. They're engineers! > > _______________________________________________ > Flightgear-devel mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel ________________________________________________________________________ Want to chat instantly with your online friends? Get the FREE Yahoo! Messenger http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com/ _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
