From: Jonathan Morton <chromatix99@gmail.com>
To: Jesper Louis Andersen <jesper.louis.andersen@gmail.com>
Cc: davecb@spamcop.net, bloat <bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net>
Subject: Re: [Bloat] Seen in passing: mention of Valve's networking scheme and RFC 5348
Date: Tue, 3 Apr 2018 15:14:19 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <8DE589C3-9537-416D-AC7C-9250464869F9@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAGrdgiVjdkGeGtt6zfkq0ep2ibjgTeJkONJZ0cYW8o7kdGm8oQ@mail.gmail.com>
> On 3 Apr, 2018, at 2:54 pm, Jesper Louis Andersen <jesper.louis.andersen@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Apart from that, it seems like a lot of things are being done correctly. I *much* prefer a message-based protocol where packets use protobufs in many scenarios over a stream-oriented protocol. The former forces people to program around having limited buffers and this usually puts a flow control scheme into their programs, whereas a badly written stream transmission just creates trouble; some of those being in the security area.
I'm reminded of the original taxonomy where "reliable stream" (TCP) and "unreliable datagram" (UDP) were only two possibilities in a much wider kingdom. The absence of "reliable datagram" in the Internet protocol suite always struck me as odd, though "unreliable stream" seemed like a contradiction in terms once you got into packet switching networks (VoIP notwithstanding). In the end, people have kept reinventing "reliable datagram" protocols on top of UDP, whenever they ran up against requirements that TCP didn't fulfil.
- Jonathan Morton
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-04-03 12:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <tag:www.oreilly.com, 2018-04-02:/ideas/four-short-links-2-april-2018@localhost.localdomain>
2018-04-02 12:46 ` David Collier-Brown
2018-04-03 11:54 ` Jesper Louis Andersen
2018-04-03 12:14 ` Jonathan Morton [this message]
2018-04-03 12:35 ` Mikael Abrahamsson
2018-04-03 14:27 ` Michael Welzl
2018-04-03 14:48 ` Jesper Louis Andersen
2018-04-03 15:04 ` Jim Gettys
2018-04-04 12:45 ` Jesper Louis Andersen
2018-04-04 13:39 ` David Collier-Brown
2018-04-03 16:14 ` Michael Welzl
2018-04-04 7:01 ` Mikael Abrahamsson
2018-04-04 7:42 ` Dave Taht
2018-04-04 7:55 ` Michael Welzl
2018-04-04 8:53 ` Mikael Abrahamsson
2018-04-04 8:52 ` Mikael Abrahamsson
2018-04-04 9:56 ` Luca Muscariello
2018-04-04 10:52 ` Mikael Abrahamsson
2018-04-04 11:06 ` Luca Muscariello
2018-04-05 0:04 ` Marcelo Ricardo Leitner
2018-04-04 19:23 ` Michael Richardson
2018-04-04 19:38 ` Michael Welzl
2018-04-05 0:08 ` Marcelo Ricardo Leitner
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: https://lists.bufferbloat.net/postorius/lists/bloat.lists.bufferbloat.net/
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=8DE589C3-9537-416D-AC7C-9250464869F9@gmail.com \
--to=chromatix99@gmail.com \
--cc=bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net \
--cc=davecb@spamcop.net \
--cc=jesper.louis.andersen@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox