Nah, TCP is still just kicking the box over, but just kicking it over again, if the reciever doesn’t kick back a box saying they got it.
Well yes, internally that’s what it does, but from a user perspective it just looks like being handed the package, you never see any of the failed attempts (unless delivery fails completely because the company went out of business). It’s sorta more like having a butler who orders it for you and deals with any potential BS that might happen, and then just hands you the package when it finally arrives in one piece.
TCP is also deciding to ramp up the amount of boxes you kick over until the post worker gets crushed by boxes, at which point you decide to lower your box-kicking rate by half and try again.
Best explanation of congestion I’ve seen in a while
Jesus christ SSH
Can’t understand the VPN one shouldn’t the traffic pass through the VPN and then go to the user like the ssh one …
The person on the right of the VPN image is the destination server
Isn’t the can the vpn server and the guys are just vpn users?
that what I assumed
I mean I’ve been trying to formally request that ISO change the C API for
send()toyeet()for sockets where connection reliability is not required at the network interface level.That would be awesome! xD
Well, thank you, now I’m creating that exact macro in every company repo where send/sendto is used.
that’s fucking brilliant lol
Welp, time for a new language!
There’s nothing wrong with UDP. At least not that I know of.
UDP seems more like a ball fired from canon to me. You may not be prepared for it and you won’t know what state it’s in when it gets here, but that packet is making it to the gate no matter what. Or, in the rare case it doesn’t, it means someone else is having a real bad time.
You forgot to mention that you might get it twice, or thrice, or more, and in different versions.
You’re right. I forgot that grapeshot is always something to worry about.
ICMP
It’s a postcard saying “hey, thinking of you!” and there’s a picture of a wulrus on it.
