[e2e] TCP Framing

[Vernon Schryver]

> From: "David P. Reed" <dpreed at reed.com>

> ...
> This fetish of opposing UDP is based on a falsehood - that somehow UDP 
> protocols aren't TCP-friendly, or closed-loop congestion-controlling, by 
> definition.  Some may be, but that's because no one has thought it through 
> for them.

I think UDP is resisted for reasons like those that give CSMA/CD
a bad name.  People misunderstand "collision" as something bad that
breaks bits or at least uses vast quantities of bandwidth much as
a collision on a freeway causes traffic jams in both directions.
UDP is misunderstood as a bad thing because its acronym is often
expanded as the "unreliable datagram protocol" or at best as the
"unreliable user datagram protrocol."  They hear "unreliable" and
think it's not for the precious data of their wonderful application.

For proof, ask http://www.google.com/ about "unreliable datagram protocol"
(with or without the double-quotes).


Vernon Schryver    vjs at rhyolite.com