Closed. This question needs to be more focused. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it focuses on one problem only by editing this post.
Closed 8 years ago.
Improve this question
I learnt that SIP can be implemented using UDP.
Is there a way the same can be implemented using TCP ???
Thanks
SIP can not only work with UDP and TCP but also with other Transport layer protocols, like SCTP, or Application layer protocols like TLS. For a brief introduction I suggest reading Wikipedia page about SIP
SIP also allows you to switch transport protocols during the session (for example, if a message overpasses Maximum Transfer Unit size).
Related
Closed. This question needs to be more focused. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it focuses on one problem only by editing this post.
Closed 9 years ago.
Improve this question
I would like to create a new protocol, i.e having features of TCP and UDP. can you tell me what are tips and techniques are required if it is possible.
Thanks in advance
TCP gives you three features that UDP does not: (a) estimating sending rate, (b) retransmission, and (c) flow-control. In doing so, the tradefoff is that TCP becomes slower compared to UDP. So, if your application is delay sensitive, which is typically true for audio/video applications, then you need to start with UDP and keep whichever of the above three you want. Typically, UDP applications might add forward-error-correction or application layer packet-book-keeping to ensure retransmission.
There is yet another advantage that UDP offers which TCP does not: if you have an application that might use mulitcast. For such cases, UDP would be the right chioce since UDP can handle point to multipoint. Using TCP for multicast applications would be hard since now the sender would have to keep track of retransmissions/sending rate for multiple receivers.
So, in summary, UDP will offer you two features that TCP cannot: lower-delay and ability to do multicast. So, this way, we can actually reduce the scope of the question and ask what are the features of TCP that one would like to add to UDP since there is no way, one can add features of UDP to TCP.
Closed. This question is off-topic. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it's on-topic for Stack Overflow.
Closed 9 years ago.
Improve this question
This shows a network of 3 workstations and a router. below is the routing table of PC 1
If PC1 sends a packet to PC 2. How would it get to the destination?
As I have understood PC1 would refer its routing table, and broadcast the packet.For that which entry in the routing table would it make use of?
It's the third entry in your routing table: 172.16.18.0/24 is routed through 172.16.18.1 which is local network interface. Thus the OS knows that packets to this network should be delivered through this interface.
Closed. This question is off-topic. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it's on-topic for Stack Overflow.
Closed 10 years ago.
Improve this question
to settle an argument at work.
Is it possible, in theory, to create a network protocol with ports higher than 65535 and get it approved by IANA ?
if not, why not ?
Yes. It is possible to create one with an arbitrary number of ports.
Getting it approved by IANA (and IETF, ISO and whoever else are concerned) is just a matter of getting enough people to use your wonderful new invention. Which is extremely unlikely but not theoretically impossible.
If you are using TCP or UDP on top of IP, then no. Both TCP and UDP only use 16 bits for the port number. If you are using some other protocol suite such as IPX/SPX, then it depends on that protocol. If you are making your own protocol, then you can do whatever you want. Getting it approved by IANA is a different story.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transmission_Control_Protocol
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_Datagram_Protocol
2^16 = 65536 different ports
Since computer numbers start counting at 0, this leaves 65535 as the max.
Closed. This question needs to be more focused. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it focuses on one problem only by editing this post.
Closed 9 years ago.
Improve this question
I am not familiar with ZigBee technology. And I am bit confused. Does Zigbee need a transmitter and receiver? How is its networking flow?
I was thinking of the notifications that our system have would be send to an application in a PC via ZigBee. That is, drop rate changes of dextrose shows in an application / interface.
ZigBee is built on top of the 802.15.4 standard. It's a bi-directional protocol... so to participate in a ZigBee network (or any 802.15.4 network) you need a transceiver (transmitter+receiver). There are lots of products on the market, but I'd suggest you take a look at the Digi XBee modules. A lot of the complexity of implementing ZigBee is built into the modules so that you don't have to worry about it.
The book "Building Wireless Sensor Networks" by O'Reilly is a good start if you go the XBee route.
Closed. This question is off-topic. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it's on-topic for Stack Overflow.
Closed 12 years ago.
Improve this question
How many TCP segments are required to establish a TCP connection? What important control information is carried in these TCP segments, and why?
Here is the wikipedia article on TCP and here is the RFC. In the future, don't just paste your assignments verbatim.