I obviously need to read up on PGM. I'd imagine some combination of forward EC + no back channel would probably satisfy our applications, I'd probably be pretty happy w/ a 50% FEC penalty in exchange for no back channel.
Thanks for the info... know what I'll be digging in to tonight! On Mon, Jan 3, 2011 at 4:49 PM, Steven McCoy <steven.mc...@miru.hk> wrote: > On 4 January 2011 04:41, Scott <alcoholi...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Has there been much historical discussion about UNRELIABLE multicast >> PUB/SUB? We certainly have applications that just use OSC/UDP >> multicast, since it's better for the application to get the latest >> data if it didn't get a previous message; but I'd rather migrate >> everything to zmq! >> > > Some brief discussion, basically on a switched network you always need some > re-ordering and you can get a basic re-ordering transport with PGM with a > very small window size. > PGM allows a lot of different architectures, such as disabling the > back-channel, using Forward-Error-Correction, local network repairers, and > even congestion control. > The only two alternatives to look at really are UDT for high speed high > latency unicast links for when TCP congestion control is too harsh, and the > recent UDPCP in Linux for very low overhead rather synchronous messaging. > http://lwn.net/Articles/421435/ > -- > Steve-o > _______________________________________________ > zeromq-dev mailing list > zeromq-dev@lists.zeromq.org > http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev > > _______________________________________________ zeromq-dev mailing list zeromq-dev@lists.zeromq.org http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
