On 24/08/05 23:44 -0700, Trevor Warren wrote: > > > Morning Sir, > > --- Devdas Bhagat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 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 -- http://mm.ilug-bom.org.in/mailman/listinfo/linuxers
