On Wed, Oct 20, 1999 at 03:09:48PM +0200, Magosanyi Arpad wrote:
> With plain UDP you are subject to DOS attack, lost messages, maliciously
> inserted log messages, etc.
DoS attack can be performed even using TCP, lost messages can be handled with
an ACK, yes TCP do this without additional coding but I think at scalability.
I start with something like old, simple UDP-protocol
if in a particular context
I need not one message lost I use an ACK
if I need to stop maliciously inserted log I use an hash
and so...
> To eliminate these deficiencies you should build a reliable transmission
> protocol on top of UDP. That is TCP, but you have made a lot of unnecessary
> efforts to reinvent the wheel.
Yep but TCP become a lot redundant if I for example needs only
strong auth. Instead of insert a 160 bit overhead for a SHA1 I must
perform the three way handshake etc.
> What is your problem with a lot of tcp connections besides having a big
> output of netstat -na?
The problem is that the performace aren't the last problem :)
antirez
