jkn wrote:
Hi all
This is a little bit OT for this newsgroup, but I intend to use python
for prototyping at least, and I know there are a lot of knowledgeable
people using Python in a Network context here...
I have a use case of a single 'master' machine which will need to
On Mon, 17 Nov 2014 08:56:43 +1100, Chris Angelico wrote:
On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 4:21 AM, Roy Smith r...@panix.com wrote:
In article mailman.15887.1416150791.18130.python-l...@python.org,
Chris Angelico ros...@gmail.com wrote:
UDP for anything more than your network's MTU is inefficient
On 2014-11-16, jkn jkn...@nicorp.f9.co.uk wrote:
An analogy might be with a master and multiple slave devices sharing
a serial RS-485 bus.
If that's the model you _want_, then UDP multicast matches it almost
exactly. ;)
I have control over the format of the data to be send, so there can
Hi all
This is a little bit OT for this newsgroup, but I intend to use python
for prototyping at least, and I know there are a lot of knowledgeable
people using Python in a Network context here...
I have a use case of a single 'master' machine which will need to
periodically 'push' data to
On Sun, Nov 16, 2014 at 11:02 PM, jkn jkn...@nicorp.f9.co.uk wrote:
I have a use case of a single 'master' machine which will need to
periodically 'push' data to a variety of 'slave' devices on a small local
subnet, over Ethernet. We are talking perhaps a dozen devices in all with
comms
jkn jkn...@nicorp.f9.co.uk:
Although this ... works ..., we have had trouble maintaining the
connection, for reasons ... I am not yet fully aware of.
I can see your TCP connections are choppy. Your posting is breaking up.
Seriously, though, there shouldn't be any reason for TCP connections
jkn jkn...@nicorp.f9.co.uk writes:
I have a use case of a single 'master' machine which will need to
periodically 'push' data to a variety of 'slave' devices on a small local
subnet, over Ethernet. We are talking perhaps a dozen devices in all with
comms occurring perhaps once very few
On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 12:43 AM, Alain Ketterlin
al...@dpt-info.u-strasbg.fr wrote:
jkn jkn...@nicorp.f9.co.uk writes:
I have a use case of a single 'master' machine which will need to
periodically 'push' data to a variety of 'slave' devices on a small local
subnet, over Ethernet. We are
On 2014-11-16, jkn jkn...@nicorp.f9.co.uk wrote:
I have a use case of a single 'master' machine which will need to
periodically 'push' data to a variety of 'slave' devices on a small
local subnet, over Ethernet. We are talking perhaps a dozen devices
in all with comms occurring perhaps once
On 2014-11-16, Chris Angelico ros...@gmail.com wrote:
OK, no big requirements, but 64K is still way too much to consider UDP.
I wouldn't say way too much; the packet limit for UDP is actually
64KB (minus a few bytes of headers). But UDP for anything more than
your network's MTU is
In article mailman.15887.1416150791.18130.python-l...@python.org,
Chris Angelico ros...@gmail.com wrote:
UDP for anything more than your network's MTU is inefficient
Why do you say it's inefficient? Sure, the UDP datagram will get
fragmented and re-assembled at the other end, but it's not
On 2014-11-16, Roy Smith r...@panix.com wrote:
In article mailman.15887.1416150791.18130.python-l...@python.org,
Chris Angelico ros...@gmail.com wrote:
UDP for anything more than your network's MTU is inefficient
Why do you say it's inefficient? Sure, the UDP datagram will get
fragmented
Hi All
Thanks for the various and interesting responses so far. A bit of
fleshing out in a few areas:
The problems of maintaining the long-term TCP connection is something I'd
like to leave to one side, for now at least. There are some non-technical
project issues here which is why I am
On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 4:21 AM, Roy Smith r...@panix.com wrote:
In article mailman.15887.1416150791.18130.python-l...@python.org,
Chris Angelico ros...@gmail.com wrote:
UDP for anything more than your network's MTU is inefficient
Why do you say it's inefficient? Sure, the UDP datagram
14 matches
Mail list logo
