Re: Linux TCP - unexpected retransmissions

Rick Jones wrote:

Tim S <ts@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
However, I do wonder if the OP has considered dumping IP and just
throwing raw ethernet frames around? Hard to say whether it would be
better or not - depends on the hardware setup, but it's worth a
though.

One of those damned if you do, damned if you don't things I suspect.
One could go with direct Ethernet, but then one has to segment
oneself, as well as deal with lost traffic. One does have the
advantage of being able to use one's own retransmission timeouts.
Having doe that though, some months later someone will want to be able
to run the application between two sites, without any bridging
available and then the lack of routing (since we've ditched IP) will
come back to haunt.

Also, with direct Ethernet, there are only so many Ethertypes/SAPs one
can use which may make multiple "connections" a bit difficult. The
author might have to write her own connection multiplex/demultiplex.

rick jones

Yes - I should clarify. I've seriously considered using plain ethernet for a
point-to-point link where one half of the link is hosted by a fairly dumb
embedded system (too dumb to run a "proper" OS, but highly specialised for
its task) and where the link's purpose is to feed data to a more
intelligent but less specialised embedded board.

Cheers

Tim
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: NMEA ref.clock better than my ISPs timeserver?
    ... I'm just channeling dimm memories of what half-duplex wired ... Ethernet used to be like under load:) ...
    (comp.protocols.time.ntp)
  • PPPoE
    ... Not to ask too dumb a question, but on my Ethernet ... where is the the configuration ... right under my nose!) ...
    (microsoft.public.win2000.networking)