begin quoting boblq as of Mon, Apr 17, 2006 at 09:37:05PM -0700: > On Monday 17 April 2006 06:04 pm, Stewart Stremler wrote: > > > TCP is hard to replace ... > I agree. > > > you end up implementing something that looks > > an awful lot like TCP. > > Not necessarily. One may blow off ack/nak and go with > forward error correction ... and thus have a whole new > thing with some very different attributes and issues.
Forward error correction is fun stuff... and if you have a pretty reliable IP layer and aren't going to try to handle the case of the the user unplugging the network, I suppose you could blow off any sort of ack/nak. The project I was working on seriously throttled back on acknowledgements and requests for retransmissions, and in the end, it was only significatly better than TCP/IP for reliable data transfer in a rather limited set of circumstances. (High-bandwidth Very-Long-Latency) If you're not worried about backhoes, yeah, you're totally right. :) -- _ |\_ \| -- [email protected] http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
