: thus on Sat, 8 Nov 1997 20:26:38 -0500, Big virtually wrote: Big> I have been toying with this idea, and I'm asking you guys from some Big> input: What are the pros and cons of redoing circle to make use of Big> UDP? I'm a network/software engineer, and may be because I use UDP, I Big> can't take that objective "step back" and see the flaws, but I feel as Big> though a good case could be made. UDP would allow: *multicast Big> communications *streaming (which could lead to some really cool stuff) Big> *vastly reduced network overhead I realize that in heavy lag Big> conditions you'd lose a lot of packets, but we've all heard the excuse Big> "I didn't see it -- it scrolled by too fast after I unfroze from lag." Big> leading me to believe that lost data packets would not severely impact Big> the majority of players. If a player wishes to see all that info, Big> then there is no reason why the burden can't be shifted to the client Big> side of the house. In fact, UDP can be configured to fire off Big> variable byte size packets depending on network latency (many small Big> packets in high lag, fewer giant packets in light lag -- a synced Big> buffering system comes to mind). Of course, nanny.c and the extraction Big> rules would need to be retooled for this to even begin to be possible Big> (not to mention clients), but that's why I'm asking you guys for Big> suggestions. Someone tell me this is a bad, bad idea. :) And to anyone Big> that still considers UDP to be TCP's poor cousin and not robust enough Big> to handle a mud, take a look at NFS -- its UDP :) TCP can do MTU discovery, actually it's the only way to do MTU discovery, TCP is a full duplex connection, it requires a connection. There is already a widely available client that does TCP, it's called telnet. This is the main reason as to why muds are so popular, the underlying client doesn't have to be that great. If you want a good example of a UCP client, netrek, the paradise server. But then you limit yourself to those who have clients. Multicasting in theory is very nice, and the mbone has been interesting to play with, but I fail to see how multicasting helps in a mud environment. The best pro for multicasting is the cut back in local area traffic caused by broadcasting, the multicasted data only exceeds the datalink layer by one step, the protocol layer, it never reachs transport layer. This can be a considerable savings in CPU, it doesn't apply to muds unless you want to connect several servers togethers. d. +------------------------------------------------------------+ | Ensure that you have read the CircleMUD Mailing List FAQ: | | http://democracy.queensu.ca/~fletcher/Circle/list-faq.html | +------------------------------------------------------------+
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 12/08/00 PST