Xref: utzoo comp.protocols.nfs:626 comp.protocols.tcp-ip:9676 Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!clyde.concordia.ca!uunet!samsung!usc!apple!ginger.acc.com!salt.acc.com!art From: art@salt.acc.com (Art Berggreen) Newsgroups: comp.protocols.nfs,comp.protocols.tcp-ip Subject: Re: Which gives best data integrity: NFS, UUCP, or FTP? Message-ID: <1989Dec21.182404.5543@ginger.acc.com> Date: 21 Dec 89 18:24:04 GMT References: <1972@dover.sps.mot.com> <1989Dec21.025229.2837@esegue.segue.boston.ma.us> Sender: news@ginger.acc.com (USENET news) Reply-To: art@salt.acc.com (Art Berggreen) Distribution: na Organization: Advanced Computer Communications, Santa Barbara, California Lines: 12 In article <1989Dec21.025229.2837@esegue.segue.boston.ma.us> johnl@esegue.segue.boston.ma.us (John R. Levine) writes: >There are optional checksums in TCP (used by ftp) and UDP (used by nfs) >headers, but they are often turned off on the assumption that link level error >correction will be adequate. NO! Only UDP checksums are optional (a dubious option at that), TCP checksums are ALWAYS required. -- + Art Berggreen Advanced Computer Communications + | Santa Barbara Street | + (805)963-9431 Santa Barbara, CA 93101 +