> <advocate client="devil">UDP has much lower overhead and you have the > possibility to drop non-critical packets to the floor, also dropped packets > (by network congestion) don't stall the whole pipe but can be resent and > integrated later.</advocate>
Exactly. With UDP, we are able to sustain some packet loss without affecting the game speed (as every order is sent twice in packet N an packet N+1). This won't be possible with TCP. Any packet loss will stall the game. Furthermore, as I said before, UDP is required to trick NAT and firewalls, look at that article for a scientific analysis : http://pdos.csail.mit.edu/papers/p2pnat.pdf So switching to TCP is not impossible, but it is a huge change and should definitively not happen before 1.0, and even after I think that, for today's network model, UDP is much better suited for the task. Now, I don't say we should not write a clean and well documented lib based on the previous article to encapsulate the UDP complexity and allow syntetic testing of network layer alone. Such a lib would be very usefull. Steph -- http://nct.ysagoon.com _______________________________________________ glob2-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/glob2-devel
