Re: dsnetwork

From: Jeremy Noring (somewhere_at_thenet.com)
Date: 05/10/04


Date: Mon, 10 May 2004 15:52:20 -0600

Kent,
It is true that TCP has no respect for the timeliness of delivery, which it
does have built in quality of service.

UDP has neither--it's just a best effort delivery. Neither one really has
much of a performance benefit over the other, in my opinion.

Despite TCP having no respect for the timeliness of delivery, I find that
the latency on most LANs combined with their high bandwidth (100 mbit per
second is an awful lot to work with) makes this somewhat a moot point.
Where the timeliness really becomes a serious issue is in networks where the
latency begins to become significant--for example, when streaming media over
the Internet. If Internet streaming is what you're interested in, and
end-to-end latency is a serious issue for you, you should read the RFCs on
RTP (1889 and 1890 if memory serves me correctly). RTP uses UDP, and you
can incorporate your own QOS based upon the media you're using and the needs
of the application. Because TCP has no respect for the timeliness of
delivery, this makes it a poor candidate for lossy, unpredictable networks.
On the other hand, if you know your network is fast and has low packet loss,
TCP will do just fine.

"kent mclard" <anonymous@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:9FDA056D-A533-4D3E-94D3-45C06BD2863E@microsoft.com...
> But what about performance if I use TCP? Isnīt it much slower than UDP
because of waiting for receiving all datapackets...
> And why is there more work to do with UDP? If I look at WINSOCK how to
implement UDP or TCP Sockets I canīt see that one way is easier than the
other.
>
> Are there some code examples somewhere?
>



Relevant Pages

  • Re: UDP vs TCP
    ... I understand that UDP doesn't guarantee proper delivery of the message, that's why we have to add the CRC to the message to check if the message received is correct. ... TCP for instance will break up a large packet into smaller ... > into the packets and then the receiving app would have to read ...
    (microsoft.public.vb.enterprise)
  • RE: Why TCP is more secure than UDP?
    ... TCP vs. UDP delivery mechanisms? ... Why TCP is more secure than UDP? ... Some TCP attacks require the attacker to see the response packets in order ...
    (Security-Basics)
  • Re: Differnce in size of TCP and UDP
    ... According to my experience there ain't no big advantage in using UDP. ... UDP does not offer "safe" end-to-and delivery of data i.e. there is no guarantee at all that sended data are delivered to the receiving part. ... With UDP it's up to the application to implement some mechanisms to assure safe data delivery. ... disable udp and use tcp. ...
    (microsoft.public.win32.programmer.networks)
  • NFS problem with recent 2.6 kernels (also serial console weirdness)
    ... 100000 2 tcp 111 portmapper ... 100000 2 udp 111 portmapper ... mounted filesystem with ordered data mode. ... Mounted root (ext3 filesystem) readonly. ...
    (Linux-Kernel)
  • Solaris 9 <---> linux (2.6.8) NFS file locking problem?
    ... to the same file placed on nfs filesystem. ... 100000 4 tcp 111 portmapper ... 100000 4 udp 111 portmapper ... 100021 1 udp 4045 nlockmgr ...
    (SunManagers)

Quantcast