On Thu, 19 Aug 2010, Joost Huizinga wrote:

> UDT is being advertised as having an API very similar to sockets, which
> would make it fairly straightforward to move other applications /
> application layer protocols using sockets to UDT.

Oh right. That's really cool actually. It does seem to be bit lacking though,
like no support for non-blocking connects etc but it certainly makes porting
over a lot of code much easier. Unfortunately, it seems to be a C++ library
and not C, which is a big hurdle...

> The use would to transfer data to places in the world that haven't got high
> bandwidth and in particular a low latency. Those places now suffer from low
> download rates. UDT or in general UDP-based transports seem to overcome that
> issue. I do agree that the solutions do not seem very popular, so if you see
> alternatives...

Well, the alternatives are quite simply the common TCP-based protocols that
everybody is using everyday: HTTP, FTP, SFTP etc. I'm not saying there aren't
times where UDT won't outperform TCP, but quite clearly the world of today
seems to be satisfied enough with TCP.

I'm not writing off these ideas nor the protocols. They're just not very high
prio on my personal TODO list.

Thanks for bringing them to my attention!

-- 
  / daniel.haxx.se
-------------------------------------------------------------------
List admin: http://cool.haxx.se/list/listinfo/curl-library
Etiquette:  http://curl.haxx.se/mail/etiquette.html