Re: An alternative to TCP (part 1)2001-02-07 12:10:01Bob, I think I attended that BOF, but if I recall correctly I came away from it thinking that the group had based its conclusions on a fairly narrow set of assumptions about the nature and use of that protocol; change those assumptions slightly and it gets much more feasible. At any rate I don't see that this would have to be an entirely different transport protocol; it could be implemented using TCP options. If the server didn't support them, it would degrade to ordinary TCP. Keith
|
|