Re: [sc-users] TCP default?

[Michael Zacherl <sdiy-mz01@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 30.Dec 2016, at 16:26 , Julian Rohrhuber <julian.rohrhuber@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> I’ve had a lot of connectivity problems in WLANs that were configured to be part of a larger intranet and/or that provide two networks (e.g. 5G and 3G). But I don’t assume this would become better with TCP.

that entirely depends on the reason for this “connectivity problems”. 
if tcp doesn’t manage to collect the data required for a particular segment or session in time, software of the higher layers of the network stack should issue something like a timeout error for instance and act accordingly.
I wouldn’t know how to deal with that in SC but I’d reckon, on the bottom line it doesn’t make a big difference if tcp reports a problem and communication breaks in a controlled manner (tcp) or data just goes missing (udp).
But I think tcp’s recovery mechanisms, e.g. requesting retransmission, make a difference on a weak network link and could/would mitigate potential problems. then again, if timing is critical, tcp literally could be a show-stopper.
_______________________________________________
sc-users mailing list

info (subscription, etc.): http://www.birmingham.ac.uk/facilities/ea-studios/research/supercollider/mailinglist.aspx
archive: https://listarc.bham.ac.uk/marchives/sc-users/
search: https://listarc.bham.ac.uk/lists/sc-users/search/