3 ms·
> A better solution is to piggyback on UDP support and add your own protocol in user space. I haven't looked at the code, but I imagine this would be relativel
by wfunction 10y ago
> A better solution is to piggyback on UDP support and add your own protocol in user space.
I haven't looked at the code, but I imagine this would be relatively trivial to change if it is written at all sanely, right? Hardly sounds like a big thing to focus on.
- nrjdhsbsid 10y agoIt's just semi pointless to try to use anything but UDP and TCP on the www. If you need to encapsulate the MTU path discovery n stuff doesn't work and you're better off just using existing protocols that build on UDP. Look at all the foot dragging with IPV6, and that's just an updated version of an existing protocol with massive support behind it
- swiley 10y agoI know it's nitpicky but www != the internet.
- pzh 10y agoThe code in the article doesn't implement DCCP. It simply requests that the OS create DCCP sockets to use for their client-server example: int listen_sock = socket(AF_INET, SOCK_DCCP, IPPROTO_DCCP); If the OS doesn't support DCCP, then, tough luck...
- dom0 10y ago... can always use raw sockets, with the correct set of root-ish privileges or capabilities.
- unmole 10y agoSure, crafting packets with compliant DCCP headers is simple enough. But, implementing congestion control, which is the raison d'être of DCCP is decidedly a non-trivial undertaking.
- nrjdhsbsid 10y agoThis is already being talked at higher levels than layer 4 though, notably by LEDBAT but I'm sure there's others
- qwertyuiop924 10y agoThe problem isn't necessarily that the change would be hard, it's that getting everyone to update would be nigh-impossible.