I also just found this as well - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UFTP - UDP based FTP that can use multicast over unreliable links
The technology is apparently covered by a patent that was owned by Starburst Communications which appears to no longer exist. On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 9:18 PM, Martin Visser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I imagine the Instant Messaging paradigm is going to be closest to what you > need. XMPP - http://www.xmpp.org/ (as used in Jabber and others) I would > imagine be the most appropriate implementation to look into. Specific > ententions such as serverless messaging - > http://www.xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0174.html may be a good model. > > You may need to implement relaibility (handling lost messages) at a higher > layer > > On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 12:47 PM, Ken Foskey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> >> I have a need for a server to send out messages to every client on the >> local network. I was thinking of UDP however multicast might be a better >> fit http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multicast. >> >> I have read multicast and I cannot work out if it is like UDP (just >> packets) or like IP (sessions and retransmissions at network level). >> >> My system is one person scoring sport at bottom feeding multiple machines >> on a small network. They have to keep in sync and have ability to request >> catchup transmissions if something is missing. Data volumes would not be >> huge. >> >> There are heaps of unanswered questions like how do you allocate the >> address of the multicast? >> >> Any thoughts. >> >> Ken Foskey >> >> _______________________________________________ >> coders mailing list >> coders@slug.org.au >> http://lists.slug.org.au/listinfo/coders >> >> > > > -- > Regards, Martin > > Martin Visser -- Regards, Martin Martin Visser
_______________________________________________ coders mailing list coders@slug.org.au http://lists.slug.org.au/listinfo/coders
