Xref: utzoo comp.protocols.nfs:620 comp.protocols.tcp-ip:9645
Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!clyde.concordia.ca!uunet!aplcen!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!brutus.cs.uiuc.edu!usc!cs.utexas.edu!oakhill!dover!spanky.sps.mot.com!cowan
From: cowan@spanky.sps.mot.com
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.nfs,comp.protocols.tcp-ip
Subject: Which gives best data integrity:  NFS, UUCP, or FTP?
Message-ID: <1972@dover.sps.mot.com>
Date: 20 Dec 89 17:03:47 GMT
Sender: news@dover.sps.mot.com
Reply-To: cowan@spanky.sps.mot.com ()
Distribution: na
Organization: Motorola, Inc., Semiconductor Products Sector
Lines: 25


Any one got a few minutes to answer a few questions?  

For UUCP, FTP, and NFS, in what way (if any) do each of these programs
perform data integrity checks and data correction?  I'm not talking
about how a packet reaches the destination, but how, if by sheer magic
a bit in the data being transferred is munged up, it is detected and
corrected.  At what levels (in the protocol stack) is the data
integrity checking done.

What I'm really interested in is knowing is: Which one of these three
methods is most reliable (in a data integrity sense) for transferring
data, and why?   (Opinions, without sensible backing arguments, will
be directed to /dev/null.)

Any takers?


 Andy Cowan
 cowan@soleil.sps.mot.com
 (602)821-4942

 Andy Cowan
 cowan@soleil.sps.mot.com
 (602)821-4942