> TCP does a woeful job Not just TCP. Network operators are guilty too. There are the network side megalith buffers that are trying hard to "optimise" TCP tran

> TCP does a woeful job Not just TCP. Network operators are guilty too. There are the network side megalith buffers that are trying hard to "optimise" TCP transfers and just murder latency. Then, precisely because TCP is a stateful protocol and clients have the retransmission logic built in, the operators also have the option of applying something like RED at the earliest sign of network congestion. False positive or not. (Note: I have a friend who works on the other side of the table and runs a team of engineers responsible for installing new mobile network equipment in the field. The use of mobile networks grows faster than the operators and their contractors can add capacity. Which means the situation is unlikely to improve soon.) As you mentioned earlier, UDP at least has the distinction of being used in real-time and streaming protocols => operators and network gear are more reluctanct to mess with it. If you think you can get away with it, you could also assign multiple ports to any single session and apply at-least-once logic to the transmission - or to put it in layman's terms: blast and spam the network, in order to get even a single datagram out without excess delay. Do that often enough and you can expect the operators to crack down on it, though... As for work: thanks :-)