10 Nov
2022
10 Nov
'22
2:28 a.m.
Sure. And if you have a high enough loss rate you might want DDCMP over TCP on the
grounds that TCP retransmits more quickly than the usual DDCMP. If the loss rate is
modest, DDCMP over UDP works well. And of course DDCMP works well on really slow links,
like the 9600 bps link to my Pro (which only barely works even at that speed).
paul
On Nov 9, 2022, at 8:17 PM, Peter Lothberg
<roll(a)stupi.com> wrote:
I would claim that Van Jacobsen TCP works better than DDCMP over the Internet....
-P
----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul Koning"
<paulkoning(a)comcast.net>
To: "The Hobbyist DECnet mailing list" <hecnet(a)lists.dfupdate.se>
Cc: "Bob Armstrong" <bob(a)jfcl.com>
Sent: Wednesday, November 9, 2022 1:26:39 PM
Subject: [HECnet] Re: Ad-hoc connection to hecnet?
Ethernet is meant for short distances and very
low loss rates. While it (and
GRE) will work across oceans given the modern Internet, performance may not be
optimal. That's especially true with bridged Ethernet if you have lots of
stations on the bridge.
DDCMP is specifically for long distance point to point links, and works better
than Ethernet if there is a non-trivial packet loss rate.
I tend to pick DDCMP fairly often even though these points were a lot more valid
40 years ago than they are today.
paul
_______________________________________________
HECnet mailing list -- hecnet(a)lists.dfupdate.se
To unsubscribe send an email to hecnet-leave(a)lists.dfupdate.se
_______________________________________________
HECnet mailing list -- hecnet(a)lists.dfupdate.se
To unsubscribe send an email to hecnet-leave(a)lists.dfupdate.se