Prevalence of UDP-Lite? IP proto 136 - TCP-IP

This is a discussion on Prevalence of UDP-Lite? IP proto 136 - TCP-IP ; Howdy, Went poking through the IP protocol list the other day and discovered UDP-Lite. After reading bits of the RFC I'm interested in using this in an application. So my question is: How broadly supported is it? Do any OS's ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 4 of 4

Thread: Prevalence of UDP-Lite? IP proto 136

  1. Prevalence of UDP-Lite? IP proto 136

    Howdy,

    Went poking through the IP protocol list the other day and discovered
    UDP-Lite. After reading bits of the RFC I'm interested in using this in
    an application.

    So my question is: How broadly supported is it? Do any OS's have it in
    their TCP/IP Stack code by default these days, or does everything need
    a patch? A related question: Is the Win32 TCP/IP stack modular like the
    linux kernel? Can you shim into it without huge gobs of proprietary
    (expensive) libs?

    Any help appreciated!

    -Thanks
    -Matt


  2. Re: Prevalence of UDP-Lite? IP proto 136

    "shrike@cyberspace.org" writes:
    > Went poking through the IP protocol list the other day and discovered
    > UDP-Lite. After reading bits of the RFC I'm interested in using this in
    > an application.


    The protocol appears to depend somewhat on having an underlying link
    layer that does only "partial" error detection (i.e., omitting part of
    the frame from the usual FCS computation), and an application that can
    deal with partially-corrupt data. Without those things, it's
    essentially the same as UDP.

    Link layers, at least, that have that property seem to be few and far
    between.

    > So my question is: How broadly supported is it? Do any OS's have it in
    > their TCP/IP Stack code by default these days, or does everything need


    I don't know of any deployed implementations. The closest references
    I can find are what appear to be experimental versions and research
    projects of various sorts:

    http://www.inria.fr/rapportsactivite...ics/uid23.html
    http://www.rus.uni-stuttgart.de/nks/...?id=31&type=98
    http://linux-net.osdl.org/index.php/TODO
    http://rohc.sourceforge.net/
    http://research.microsoft.com/msripv6/ReadMe.htm

    --
    James Carlson, KISS Network
    Sun Microsystems / 1 Network Drive 71.232W Vox +1 781 442 2084
    MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 42.496N Fax +1 781 442 1677

  3. Re: Prevalence of UDP-Lite? IP proto 136

    Howdy,

    Yep, you get no benefit in the core network. Even worse you can't use
    IPSec with it without negating error tolerance as a feature.

    The obvious application is passing data over IP, stripping the IP
    header and dumping UDP lite into a modulator and then into a radio.
    Under those circumstances you do get some benefit, particularly if
    there is a session layer that does forward error correction.


  4. Re: Prevalence of UDP-Lite? IP proto 136


    shrike@cyberspace.org wrote:
    > A related question: Is the Win32 TCP/IP stack modular like the
    > linux kernel? Can you shim into it without huge gobs of proprietary
    > (expensive) libs?



    Look into the Windows Socket Service Provider Interface (SPI). You can
    do at least some of that with a layered service provider.


+ Reply to Thread