3 ms·
I can't imagine they'd need the TCP/IP stack. You might do better with something like: SOH<header data>EOH STX<data>ETX CRC EOT Then the receiver would send
by JustSomeNobody 9y ago
I can't imagine they'd need the TCP/IP stack. You might do better with something like:
SOH<header data>EOH STX<data>ETX CRC EOT
Then the receiver would send an ACK or NACK.
Repeat as necessary.
- dx034 9y agoWould you even acknowledge? The data is worthless after one round-trip, so you wouldn't send it twice. The receiver just needs to make sure that they read information correctly and can deal with losses.
- JustSomeNobody 9y agoYou're right, there's probably no need to care in this scenario.
- jandrese 9y agoWouldn't it be valuable to know if your trade actually occurred?
- dx034 8y agoNo, your trading engine is on the other end, the link only sends prices. Let's assume you want to trade on a future in Chicago that's based on London prices (e.g. a world wide equity index). You know Chicago prices and NYC prices and what people in Chicago think London prices are. If you then get from London a price indication that this has changed, you can quickly trade against it to make money. The London link never needs to know what happened, they just send prices that could be interesting. All logic sits at the exchange where trades happen since that's dependent on local prices at time of execution.
- bobvan13 8y agoRight. A shortwave link would be used in addition to a fiber link, not as a replacement for it. Assuming ACKs aren't latency sensitive, they could flow back over the fiber.