@ToseNikolov What you are talking about isn't about the design of UDP. UDP is correctly designed. TCP is not.
-
-
-
@ToseNikolov Really it is only because IPV4's address space was too small that TCP is ever even marginally more useful (due to persistence), - Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
@cmuratori Ye h, UDP is won erf l.Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
@ToseNikolov It is a mismatch with the underlying hardware. "Connections" don't actually exist, only packets. -
@ToseNikolov So basically everything written with TCP pretty much sucks, and has all these bad stalls and performance problems.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
@ToseNikolov Well, A) no, firewalls allow receiving UDP just fine, and B) again, this is because NAT/firewall design is ass. -
@cmuratori@ToseNikolov NAT/firewalls work fine with UDP as well as TCP in the majority of cases. Else DNS and NTP wouldn't work.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
@ToseNikolov That is completely false. UDP works _much better_ than TCP on unreliable networks. -
@ToseNikolov With UDP, the app is in control of what packets need acking, so it can be much better on unreliable networks.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
@ToseNikolov Dude, UDP has been the primary way that action games are able to actually work over the internet for like two decades. -
@ToseNikolov There wouldn't have been multiplayer Quake if there wasn't UDP.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
UDP. TCP is
.