UDP PACKET LOSS - TCP-IP

This is a discussion on UDP PACKET LOSS - TCP-IP ; On Oct 15, 8:56*pm, Jorgen Grahn wrote: > On Wed, 15 Oct 2008 15:51:50 +0200, Johannes Bauer wrote: > > Sunny schrieb: > > >> So any > >> solution is there for getting the zeropacket > > > Buy ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 21 to 29 of 29

Thread: UDP PACKET LOSS

  1. Re: UDP PACKET LOSS

    On Oct 15, 8:56*pm, Jorgen Grahn wrote:
    > On Wed, 15 Oct 2008 15:51:50 +0200, Johannes Bauer wrote:
    > > Sunny schrieb:

    >
    > >> So any
    > >> solution is there for getting the zeropacket

    >
    > > Buy the whole network connection between the two computers and configure
    > > all routers to not dropUDPtraffic.

    >
    > He may own it already. *He was talking about "the internetwork" and a
    > "10 series" and "20 series" -- it's not clear that it's the Internet
    > we're talking about.
    >
    > On the other hand, you cannot usually own the full bandwidth even in a
    > small office network either ...
    >
    > /Jorgen
    >
    > --
    > * // Jorgen Grahn > \X/ * * snipabacken.se> * * * * *R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn!


    Hi ..
    Jorgen

    I am sending packet from 10 series system to 20 series system it will
    be internet only.........

    Regards
    Sunny G

  2. Re: UDP PACKET LOSS

    On Oct 15, 11:04*pm, Rick Jones wrote:
    > Sunny wrote:
    > > ExactlyUDPhas no flow control..
    > > As ur suggestion of the race between the sender and receiver speed.I
    > > make sure that sender speed will be *less than receiver speed.
    > > Realted to NIC/network card race .Nic card is having 100Mbps speed.so
    > > I thinink that no problem with NIC card speed.

    >
    > You also have a race with your broadband connection and the queues in
    > all those devices.


    wat it means ??????
    >
    > When someone says that a link/path/network/whatever is "lossy" it
    > means that it is normal for packets to be lost. *About the only places
    > you can expect little to nopacketlossis on a local LAN or intranet
    > and even then there are no guarantees. *If you start sendingUDP
    > datagrams across the Internet there _will_ bepacketlosses, from
    > causes and places over which you have _no_ control. No matter the rate towhich you limit your sends.


    I am getting the no UDP packet loss with in the LOCAL AREA NETWORK...
    >
    > Your only recourse is to make your application(s) robust in the face
    > ofpacketlosses by giving them some method to recover from it.
    > Typically that would be an application-level retransmission mechanism.


    Can u explain To recover from it wat method will be best?????


    >
    > rick jones
    > --
    > firebug n, the idiot who tosses a lit cigarette out his car window
    > these opinions are mine, all mine; HP might not want them anyway...
    > feel free to post, OR email to rick.jones2 in hp.com but NOT BOTH...



  3. Re: UDP PACKET LOSS

    On Oct 16, 12:12*am, David Schwartz wrote:
    > On Oct 15, 3:18*am, Sunny wrote:
    >
    > > Exactly Bert

    >
    > > I tried for the 512 bytespacketsize and 256 bytespacketsize ..for
    > > the 512 bytes i m getting too lesspacketlossand 256 bytespacket
    > > size i m getting nopacketlossupto 170Kbps client upload speed but i
    > > increase the client upload speed i m getting thepacketloss.So any
    > > solution is there for getting the zeropacket

    >
    > > Plz help me.
    > > Thanks in advance.....

    >
    > Bluntly, either learn how to useUDPor stop using it.


    >
    > I think you have fallen for the myth thatUDPis "faster" than TCP. If
    > it was, why would anyone ever use TCP?


    I know tcp is heavy weigth protcol and udp is ligth weigth
    protocol...udp is used only for the real time video and audio
    applicatios....
    >
    > TCP provides a lot of functionality thatUDPdoes not have. This
    > functionality has a cost. If you don't need some of that
    > functionality,UDPcan be better, because you don't pay the costs of
    > functionality you don't need.
    >
    > But if you do need that functionality, but you still choose to useUDP, you have three choices:
    >
    > 1) You can fail to implement functionality you need, and then your
    > application won't work.
    >
    > 2) You can implement that functionality, but not do it as well as TCP
    > does it. In which case, your choice ofUDPwill make your application
    > suck. (This seems to be where you are.)
    >
    > 3) You can implement that functionality even better than TCP, because
    > your a brilliant coder who can develop network protocols better than
    > the dummies that designed TCP. (This is where you may think you are,
    > but it's honestly not very likely.)
    >
    > TCP is carefully designed to be robust in the face ofpacketlossand
    > it's carefully designed not to cause or contribute topacketloss
    > problems. If you need this kind of functionality, you either need to
    > use TCP or implement it yourself.
    >
    > DS


    Hi
    DS

    Hey then tel me for the real time application like video conference
    which protocol u will use and one more thing in g-talk(g-mail talk)
    for the video cal they are using udp...tel me now how they are
    controlling the udp packet loss in internet

    Regards
    Sunny g


  4. Re: UDP PACKET LOSS

    On Oct 15, 11:57*pm, Sunny wrote:

    > Hey then tel me for the real time application like video conference
    > which *protocol u will use and one more thing in g-talk(g-mail talk)


    I would use UDP, but I'm an expert. You're not. The answers have
    already been given to you, but you don't understand them. You're not
    in a position to use UDP. I'm sorry, but that's true.

    > for the video cal they are using udp...tel me now *how they are
    > controlling the udp packet loss in internet


    I already explained it to you. Transmit pacing, exponential backoff,
    slow start, path MTU discovery, and all the other things that TCP
    does.

    If you choose to use UDP instead of TCP, you must look at all the
    things that TCP has that UDP doesn't. For each one, you have to decide
    whether or not you need it. If you don't need it, that's great, don't
    code it. You won't pay the performance cost. But if you *do* need it,
    you *must* code it.

    Here are a list of 10 things TCP does that UDP does not. For each one,
    study it until you understand it. Decide if you need it or not. If so,
    you *MUST* code it. It looks you probably needed, but didn't code,
    some combination of 1, 2, 3, 4, 9, and 10.

    1) Slow start
    2) Exponential backoff
    3) Transmit pacing
    4) Window sizes
    5) Detection of lost packets
    6) Retransmission of lost packets
    7) Rejection of duplicate packets
    8) Reordering of misordered packets
    9) Path MTU discovery
    10) Segmentation

    DS

  5. Re: UDP PACKET LOSS

    Sunny schrieb:

    > I know that how udp works.


    No, you don't. David Schwartz has given you dozens of pointers on what
    to look up, of which some points are not easy to understand and even
    harder to code. If you did, you wouldn't need to ask these questions.

    > and if u send grater size than the MTU
    > value then packet will be fragmented at router into number of packets
    > if we miss the one small fragmented packet at receiver side then
    > recevier will consider whole packet will loss.


    It's not only fragmentation which is your problem (which is why David
    told you to read about path MTU discovery). It's a WHOLE bunch of other
    things.

    > but the thing is how we can improve udp packet loss in the
    > internet????????????????


    Buy the internet. It's the only reliable way.

    > you know G-TALK(GMAIL-TALK) they are using udp packet for video
    > cal........


    Actually, no, I don't - and I don't need to.

    > How they are achieving the no packet loss in the internet?????????


    They are not, because they didn't buy the internet. They handle the
    negative effects of packet loss gracefully and react accordingly (e.g.
    request retransmit, send packets at a slower rate and so forth). Really,
    take the time, look up the 10 points David gave you in Wikipedia and
    you'll see why TCP "just works" and UDP is hell of a lot more complicated.

    Regards,
    Johannes

    --
    "Meine Gegenklage gegen dich lautet dann auf bewusste Verlogenheit,
    verlästerung von Gott, Bibel und mir und bewusster Blasphemie."
    -- Prophet und Visionär Hans Joss aka HJP in de.sci.physik
    <48d8bf1d$0$7510$5402220f@news.sunrise.ch>

  6. Re: UDP PACKET LOSS

    Digital Mercenary For Honor schrieb:

    >> Seriously: You do not have a clue about what UDP is and what it does. It
    >> is *explicitly* allowed that packets arrive in different order than they
    >> were send or that packets do not arrive at all, at the mercy of the
    >> routers inbetween.

    >
    > I'm getting a little fed up with these "Do My Homework, Please" postings
    > too, which are prompting eloquent and detailed explanations from folks
    > in this group that have really deep experience and insights. This is
    > resulting in not a running conversation, but the recipient complaining
    > about how all that technical detail doesn't give them something they can
    > copy, plagiarize, and pass along as their own.


    Well, I doubt this one is trying to get homework solved. However, I
    agree that the effort that experienced people put in writing answers
    often is in the order of magnitudes greater than the effort the "wat you
    mean" people invest in their problem by themselves. Although this is a
    discomforting feeling...

    > Sometimes I like these postings because they seem to bring out those
    > deep insights that are cool to read from everyone.


    ....I also enjoy reading sophisticated replies. There's always something
    to learn.

    > Maybe we ought to police the group ourselves and avoid responding to
    > ones as is reasonable that are obviously requests from people that don't
    > want to think, but just want a passing grade - I don't want those people
    > in the industry, do you? At the same time I'd hate to think we'd miss a
    > request from a legitimate poster.


    Well, my intuition tells me that there will be zero to none false
    negatives. Then again, it's anyone's time to spare with whatever he/she
    likes.

    > On this post thread, I was done with the OP as soon as I read the : "wat
    > you mean?????????????"


    kan you ecplain!!!!!!???? ;-)

    Regards,
    Johannes

    --
    "Meine Gegenklage gegen dich lautet dann auf bewusste Verlogenheit,
    verlästerung von Gott, Bibel und mir und bewusster Blasphemie."
    -- Prophet und Visionär Hans Joss aka HJP in de.sci.physik
    <48d8bf1d$0$7510$5402220f@news.sunrise.ch>

  7. Re: UDP PACKET LOSS

    I think there may be some serious terminology disconnects at work
    here. To that end, I think it would be very helpful for Sonny to get
    a copy of some of the works of W. Richard Stevens such as TCP/IP
    Illustrated and perhaps Unix Network Programming and study them for a
    while.

    rick jones
    --
    portable adj, code that compiles under more than one compiler
    these opinions are mine, all mine; HP might not want them anyway...
    feel free to post, OR email to rick.jones2 in hp.com but NOT BOTH...

  8. Re: UDP PACKET LOSS

    On Oct 16, 11:27*pm, Rick Jones wrote:
    > I think there may be some serious terminology disconnects at work
    > here. *To that end, I think it would be very helpful for Sonny to get
    > a copy of some of the works of W. Richard Stevens such as TCP/IP
    > Illustrated and perhaps Unix Network Programming and study them for a
    > while.
    >
    > rick jones
    > --
    > portable adj, code that compiles under more than one compiler
    > these opinions are mine, all mine; HP might not want them anyway...
    > feel free to post, OR email to rick.jones2 in hp.com but NOT BOTH...


    OK...
    Rick Jobnes....

    I think Internetworking with TCP/IP By Douglas E. Comer this book also
    better for while........

    Regards
    Sunny @sunil kumar

  9. Re: UDP PACKET LOSS

    On Oct 16, 6:07*pm, Johannes Bauer wrote:
    > Digital Mercenary For Honor schrieb:
    >
    > >> Seriously: You do not have a clue about whatUDPis and what it does. It
    > >> is *explicitly* allowed that packets arrive in different order than they
    > >> were send or that packets do not arrive at all, at the mercy of the
    > >> routers inbetween.

    >
    > > I'm getting a little fed up with these "Do My Homework, Please" postings
    > > too, which are prompting eloquent and detailed explanations from folks
    > > in this group that have really deep experience and insights. This is
    > > resulting in not a running conversation, but the recipient complaining
    > > about how all that technical detail doesn't give them something they can
    > > copy, plagiarize, and pass along as their own.

    >
    > Well, I doubt this one is trying to get homework solved. However, I
    > agree that the effort that experienced people put in writing answers
    > often is in the order of magnitudes greater than the effort the "wat you
    > mean" people invest in their problem by themselves. Although this is a
    > discomforting feeling...
    >
    > > Sometimes I like these postings because they seem to bring out those
    > > deep insights that are cool to read from everyone.

    >
    > ...I also enjoy reading sophisticated replies. There's always something
    > to learn.
    >
    > > Maybe we ought to police the group ourselves and avoid responding to
    > > ones as is reasonable that are obviously requests from people that don't
    > > want to think, but just want a passing grade - I don't want those people
    > > in the industry, do you? At the same time I'd hate to think we'd miss a
    > > request from a legitimate poster.

    >
    > Well, my intuition tells me that there will be zero to none false
    > negatives. Then again, it's anyone's time to spare with whatever he/she
    > likes.
    >
    > > On this post thread, I was done with the OP as soon as I read the : "wat
    > > you mean?????????????"

    >
    > kan you ecplain!!!!!!???? ;-)
    >
    > Regards,
    > Johannes
    >
    > --
    > "Meine Gegenklage gegen dich lautet dann auf bewusste Verlogenheit,
    > verlästerung von Gott, Bibel und mir und bewusster Blasphemie."
    > * * * * *-- Prophet und Visionär Hans Joss aka HJP in de.sci.physik
    > * * * * * * * * * * * * *<48d8bf1d$0$7510$54022....@news.sunrise.ch>


    Hi all

    Go through this link
    http://www.isoc.org/INET97/proceedings/F3/F3_1.HTM#ref2
    It will give Characteristics of UDP Packet Loss: Effect of TCP Traffic

    Regards
    Sunny G

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2