Re: Log Out Issues
From: Alexander Nickolov (agnickolov_at_mvps.org)
Date: 09/03/04
- Next message: Peter Carlson: "WSAAsyncSelect vs IOCP"
- Previous message: Chris: "Re: get IP from MAC address"
- In reply to: Callum Winter: "Re: Log Out Issues"
- Next in thread: Arkady Frenkel: "Re: Log Out Issues"
- Reply: Arkady Frenkel: "Re: Log Out Issues"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Fri, 3 Sep 2004 09:58:55 -0700
The reason UDP is preferred is because it does not implement
connection throttling, e.g. it does not limit the bandwidth to prevent
packet loss. However, there's no magic here - if you exceed your
bandwidth, your perormance may be worse than TCP. The trick
would be if your protocol anticipates packet loss and does not
need to retransmit a small percentage of the packets altogether.
Anyway, that's beyond your question. For connection termination,
use TCP's half close and the fin wait / time wait connection states.
See http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc793.html page 36-37.
-- ===================================== Alexander Nickolov Microsoft MVP [VC], MCSD email: agnickolov@mvps.org MVP VC FAQ: http://www.mvps.org/vcfaq ===================================== "Callum Winter" <callum@REMOVE_THISwinter9999.fsnet.co.uk> wrote in message news:%23IKmfFakEHA.3520@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl... > Hi Alex, > > I would be quite happy to use TCP to save headaches, but from every source > ive read during my learning, UDP is the way to go for internet games. > Apparently the extra overhead in TCP can cause a lot more lag in your > game, > especially in the MMORPG variety where a mass of data passing is required > to > keep everything running. > > If you can confirm that these comments are out of date then ill move over > to > TCP, but I ask why do most top online games use UDP for their protocol if > TCP were better. > > I already have reliable/ordered/multithreaded communication, I just need > help with this one logging out/message passing problem. I must at least > try > the fastest method before I give in and move to the simpler but slower > method of communication, as speed will effect the total number of players > I > can have per hosting server. > > Do you know of any good resources that at least give some varied solutions > to this problem. > > Your comments are appreciated. > Callum. > > > "Alexander Nickolov" <agnickolov@mvps.org> wrote in message > news:uCCMa9TkEHA.2664@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl... >> Any reason you are not using TCP instead of UDP? TCP handles >> all these details already. If you want, you can implement TCP's >> algorithms yourself of course, but what would be your gain from >> that? TCP is implemented in the kernel thus it will be much more >> efficient... >> >> -- >> ===================================== >> Alexander Nickolov >> Microsoft MVP [VC], MCSD >> email: agnickolov@mvps.org >> MVP VC FAQ: http://www.mvps.org/vcfaq >> ===================================== >> >> "Callum Winter" <callum@REMOVE_THISwinter9999.fsnet.co.uk> wrote in > message >> news:%23PJ7Y4SkEHA.2340@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl... >> > Hi all, hope someone can help. >> > >> > I just started to learn winsock 2 a few weeks back, and ive already > wrote >> > code to send and receive user datagrams. >> > The code also performs ordering of incoming packets and sends ACKs for >> > reliable messages. >> > so that messages are resent until ACKS are received in reliable cases. >> > >> > Now all this works great but Ive come to a chicken and the egg problem >> > with >> > logging out. >> > >> > Lets say the client sends a log out request to the server reliably. The >> > server then gets this and sends a log out confirm message to the client >> > and >> > delete that host from its local list. >> > >> > If the client receives the message all is well and the client cleans up >> > >> > If the log out confirm gets lost, the client will hang forever waiting > for >> > the server to send another, which will never happen cos the server > deleted >> > that host. >> > >> > Now i could make the server wait until it gets another reply back from > the >> > client saying it got the logout confirm before it deletes, but then how >> > does >> > the client know when to stop sending this info unless the server > responds >> > back which it wont do once it deletes that host, it will only send an > ACK >> > once. If that ACK doesnt get to the client, the client will send > forever. >> > >> > This silly loop goes on and on and on. >> > >> > The only solution i can think of is to have the client time out after n >> > seconds if it doesnt receive a log out confirm. Problem here is that >> > the >> > reason it may not of received a log out confirm isa beacuse the server >> > never >> > got the log out request in the first place. >> > So if the server never gets it and the client times out the server will >> > still think they are logged in and never free up that slot in its list. > So >> > then you have to have a timer on the server etc etc. >> > >> > This is all very messy. Does anyone have any comments on the best >> > method >> > for >> > a player wanting to log out and how far to take the message back and >> > forthing. In fact how has everyone else combatted this problem. >> > >> > Any ideas would be greatly appreciated. >> > Thanks in advance. >> > Callum. >> > >> > >> >> > >
- Next message: Peter Carlson: "WSAAsyncSelect vs IOCP"
- Previous message: Chris: "Re: get IP from MAC address"
- In reply to: Callum Winter: "Re: Log Out Issues"
- Next in thread: Arkady Frenkel: "Re: Log Out Issues"
- Reply: Arkady Frenkel: "Re: Log Out Issues"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
