Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!mcsun!unido!mpirbn!p554mve
From: p554mve@mpirbn.mpifr-bonn.mpg.de (Michael van Elst)
Newsgroups: alt.sources.d
Subject: Re: v11i020: Idle demon
Message-ID: <1138@mpirbn.mpifr-bonn.mpg.de>
Date: 24 Aug 90 18:02:34 GMT
References: <77@dlss2.UUCP> <1990Aug23.051212.24281@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG> <1990Aug23.143804.24954@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> <2868@wyse.wyse.com>
Reply-To: p554mve@mpirbn.UUCP (Michael van Elst)
Organization: Max-Planck-Institut fuer Radioastronomie, Bonn
Lines: 18

In article <2868@wyse.wyse.com> bob@wyse.UUCP (Bob McGowen x4312 dept208) writes:
>If my understanding of "sliding window" protocols is correct, it IS possible
>for a download to never (or seldom) have a response.  The basic idea is that
>if an error has not occured, why spend the overhead to ack the packet.  So
>a stream of packets flows until an error.  If no problems, then no input, so
>line is idle and off we go in the middle of the transfer somewhere.

No, even with a "sliding window" protocol, acknoledgements are sent.
The main difference is that you don't wait for an ack to continue
transmission but wait if a specified number (window size) of acks
is missing.


-- 
Michael van Elst
UUCP:     universe!local-cluster!milky-way!sol!earth!uunet!unido!mpirbn!p554mve
Internet: p554mve@mpirbn.mpifr-bonn.mpg.de
                                "A potential Snark may lurk in every tree."