On 03/07/11 08:28, Arie Skliarouk wrote:
Hi,
On Sun, Jul 3, 2011 at 08:02, shimi linux...@shimi.net
mailto:linux...@shimi.net wrote:
If you want, prior to calling them, to combat them with their own
weapon, thankfully there's a UDP protocol that probably no ISP
would want to
2011/7/3 Arie Skliarouk sklia...@gmail.com
Hi,
The company I work at uses openvpn extensively. We settled on UDP-based
protocol as it is more effective than TCP based.
Inter-Israeli VPN connection works perfectly all of the time, whereas
international VPN has erratic behavior on at least
On Sun, Jul 03, 2011, geoffrey mendelson wrote about Re: UDP packets loss at
Israeli ISPs during peak hours:
That's 10 years old. Even then it was questionable, UDP packets were
dropped by ISPs all over the world when congested. That's why I worded
The expected behavior is for the IP
We are all familiar with UDP vs. TCP tradeoff, but I think it is quite
irrelevant in the context. The OP sees 50% packet loss through ISP#1
and zero packet loss through ISP#2. I do not think that one can claim
that 50% loss is normal for UDP and the network works as designed.
The upper TCP will be
On Jul 3, 2011, at 10:25 AM, Oleg Goldshmidt wrote:
We are all familiar with UDP vs. TCP tradeoff, but I think it is quite
irrelevant in the context. The OP sees 50% packet loss through ISP#1
and zero packet loss through ISP#2. I do not think that one can claim
that 50% loss is normal for UDP
On Sun, Jul 03, 2011 at 08:25:27AM +0300, geoffrey mendelson wrote:
HTTP was built around TCP because the designers wanted 100% reliablilty
instead of (possible) better performance.
FTP was built on neither. The FTP protocol uses UDP, but includes a
rudimentry implementation of the same
On Sun, Jul 3, 2011 at 11:23 AM, geoffrey mendelson
geoffreymendel...@gmail.com wrote:
However Oleg, you are missing an important bit of information. Since there
is no such thing as an internet, one ISP can not be assumed to be at all
like another. In the real world, such things are determined
On Jul 3, 2011, at 12:39 PM, Tzafrir Cohen wrote:
FTP? TFTP?
You're right, I think I confused the two. Regular FTP uses TCP.
Geoff.
--
Geoffrey S. Mendelson, N3OWJ/4X1GM
Making your enemy reliant on software you support is the best revenge.
On Jul 3, 2011, at 2:39 PM, Oleg Goldshmidt wrote:
No, Geoff, I am not missing that. What you are saying is that the 50%
loss is over the whole path that includes numerous autonomous
systems (AS), and not all of it may occur inside the ISP's network.
yes.
While this is obviously correct,
Hi,
The company I work at uses openvpn extensively. We settled on UDP-based
protocol as it is more effective than TCP based.
Inter-Israeli VPN connection works perfectly all of the time, whereas
international VPN has erratic behavior on at least one ISP. I suspect the
ISP (XFone 018) dropping
It's probably due to their over commit, and it means your UDP packets are in
queue until expired.
Since Israeli ISPs has learned the trick, I tend to believe ICMP packets
have high priority, so that no customer will be able to complain. When you
can't complain, well, it means that the problem is
On Jul 3, 2011, at 6:11 AM, Arie Skliarouk wrote:
Hi,
The company I work at uses openvpn extensively. We settled on UDP-
based protocol as it is more effective than TCP based.
Inter-Israeli VPN connection works perfectly all of the time,
whereas international VPN has erratic behavior on
On Sun, Jul 3, 2011 at 7:40 AM, geoffrey mendelson
geoffreymendel...@gmail.com wrote:
On Jul 3, 2011, at 6:11 AM, Arie Skliarouk wrote:
Hi,
The company I work at uses openvpn extensively. We settled on UDP-based
protocol as it is more effective than TCP based.
Inter-Israeli VPN
On Jul 3, 2011, at 8:02 AM, shimi wrote:
There's a very good reason of using UDP and not TCP for tunneling.
http://sites.inka.de/bigred/devel/tcp-tcp.html
That's 10 years old. Even then it was questionable, UDP packets were
dropped by ISPs all over the world when congested. That's why I
Hi,
On Sun, Jul 3, 2011 at 08:02, shimi linux...@shimi.net wrote:
If you want, prior to calling them, to combat them with their own weapon,
thankfully there's a UDP protocol that probably no ISP would want to
degrade; Try switching to port 53 :-)
I think that would not work as I observe
On Jul 3, 2011, at 8:28 AM, Arie Skliarouk wrote:
I think that would not work as I observe frequent name server errors
at exactly same periods (I am using Google's free DNS servers
8.8.8.8 and 8.8.4.4). Hmm, need to switch to the local DNS servers...
UDP is UDP. Google needs to have
On Sun, Jul 3, 2011 at 8:25 AM, geoffrey mendelson
geoffreymendel...@gmail.com wrote:
On Jul 3, 2011, at 8:02 AM, shimi wrote:
There's a very good reason of using UDP and not TCP for tunneling.
http://sites.inka.de/bigred/**devel/tcp-tcp.htmlhttp://sites.inka.de/bigred/devel/tcp-tcp.html
2011/7/3 Arie Skliarouk sklia...@gmail.com
Hi,
On Sun, Jul 3, 2011 at 08:02, shimi linux...@shimi.net wrote:
If you want, prior to calling them, to combat them with their own weapon,
thankfully there's a UDP protocol that probably no ISP would want to
degrade; Try switching to port 53 :-)
18 matches
Mail list logo
