4 ms·
I can't help thinking some of the pain could be resolved if we had a reliable datagram protocol between UDP and TCP. Delimiting a TCP stream to create a messagi
by nly 13y ago
I can't help thinking some of the pain could be resolved if we had a reliable datagram protocol between UDP and TCP. Delimiting a TCP stream to create a messaging protocol is already suboptimal and error prone, and it's the root cause of the head-of-line blocking problem experienced by HTTP ('fixed' in SPDY).
- ldng 13y agoYou mean like SCTP ? It's struggling to get traction.
- jahaja 13y agoSomething like QUIC? I reckon a few of the authors of this draft is also involved in QUIC. http://blog.chromium.org/2013/06/experimenting-with-quic.html http://blog.chromium.org/2013/06/experimenting-with-quic.htm...
- Camillo 13y agoThere can be no new layer 4 protocols due to NAT. You have to use either TCP or UDP.
- neuroscr 13y agoSo instead of doing things properly, we'll hack around it... Isn't that what we're all complaining about? Let's do it right and then fix NAT
- nly 13y agoSo we can move from IPv4 to IPv6 but not introduce a new transport because of NAT? Hmm...
- wmf 13y agoThe IPv6 transition is not going that much better than SCTP. So many people have v4-only home routers that they have no plans to ever upgrade.
- angersock 13y agoErm, reliable UDP? You can get a startling amount of the way there with sequence numbers and a few other things--it's a fun exercise.
- nly 13y agoSCTP is more modern and still under active development. RUDP only has a draft RFC and hasn't been updated since 1999.
- angersock 13y agoOh, no no no, you misunderstand--spend an afternoon to implement a reliable communication layer over UDP yourself. I don't suggest another standard (or a defunct one): roll your own.