Re: [twsocket] Silly UDP questions

2006-08-17 Thread Arno Garrels
Angus Robertson - Magenta Systems Ltd wrote:
> I know UDP is unreliable and packets may be lost, but are they
> checksum'd again corruption?  And if the checksum fails, is the packet
> then lost?

I guess it is lost, since I guess that checksum checks are done on the
IP layer.

> 
> The real question is whether my UDP protocol needs to add it's own
> checksum.

As far as I understand, no, the datagram would be ignored by winsock,
however I'm a newbee in UDP, so don't trust my statement.

> 
> Also, how reliable is having multiple applications listening for the
> same UDP packets on the same address and port on the same PC?
> Yesterday, one application was logging packets, a second was ignoring
> them, but did start working again, somehow.

Good question, but I guess it would make some proplems.


---
Arno Garrels [TeamICS]
http://www.overbyte.be/eng/overbyte/teamics.html



-- 
To unsubscribe or change your settings for TWSocket mailing list
please goto http://www.elists.org/mailman/listinfo/twsocket
Visit our website at http://www.overbyte.be


[twsocket] Silly UDP questions

2006-08-17 Thread Angus Robertson - Magenta Systems Ltd
I know UDP is unreliable and packets may be lost, but are they 
checksum'd again corruption?  And if the checksum fails, is the packet 
then lost? 

The real question is whether my UDP protocol needs to add it's own 
checksum. 

Also, how reliable is having multiple applications listening for the 
same UDP packets on the same address and port on the same PC?  
Yesterday, one application was logging packets, a second was ignoring 
them, but did start working again, somehow. 

Angus
-- 
To unsubscribe or change your settings for TWSocket mailing list
please goto http://www.elists.org/mailman/listinfo/twsocket
Visit our website at http://www.overbyte.be