On 10 April 2010 13:11, Bhavin Turakhia <[email protected]> wrote:
> * Is there a difference in terms of performance or capability in this > case? > Sometimes UDP encapsulated PGM can actually be faster but the differences are negligible until you move to hundreds of receivers and use PGM Router Assist. * What if one wants to implement a unicast delivery over UDP? Can it be done > using PGM? > The PGM protocol per se does not support unicast delivery, you can easily emulate it using topic subscriptions which would be sufficient for many cases. TIBCO's TRDP protocol covers both multicast and unicast but it's proprietary and I'd get hounded by lawyers if I do anything with it, for numerous reasons. Generally one would look at UDP unicast for low bandwidth, low latency requirements and in particular low setup and tear-down costs for new and departed peers. However universities and big institutions have used it on Internet2 for faster than TCP inter-continental transfers. For the latter there is UDT, for the former there are probably hundreds of protocols to choose from and little to distinguish between. Bit Torrent recently moved to UDP protocol trackers in order to handle requests from thousands of peers without the overhead of TCP connections. Typically on an intranet there is not such demand for scaling of peers. -- Steve-o
_______________________________________________ zeromq-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
