Thanks… I always thought the TCP layer handled the error control and assurance of packet ordering.
I know that UDP handles addresses via the IP layer… If it’s handled by the IP wouldn’t it also be handled for UDP…?
I’ve just found that the Chines build something they are likely to take short cuts and communications didn’t seem to be a worry. If it was they’d use the complete protocol…
Thanks for the clarifications…
Nice machine… I can’t hardly afford materials for my fiber… can’t image the cost of cutting sheet metal all the time…
With the wealth of knowledge you obviously have, why not just re-right whatever needs to be done? sounds like you could change chips on the board and program whatever you want.
UDP is part of the TCP/IP protocol. UDP is like “naked” TCP. Both use the same addressing and share a low level set of transport protocols. UDP is like shouting into a crowd and waiting (hoping) for the appropriate person to respond. (TCP/)IP is like point-to-point calling on a phone line.
UDP is fast, TCP/IP is reliable. UDP is best suited for broadcasts (one to many conversations) as it does not require a dedicated socket to be individually set up at each end-point. They just need to listen for traffic… (I wrote an instant messaging app which uses UDP in our offices a couple of years ago just because of this capability. …and so we don’t have to push private conversations outside our network to some central server owned by someone else.)
There is nothing wrong with Ruida using UDP on a LAN. They just did not allow it to be properly configured. Addressing is the same in any case…
While I do both hardware and software. (You can see some of my device designs at one of my companies here: Haute Solutions), Why not just ask the folks who write the firmware (Ruida) make a simple (and needed) change to fix their software for EVERYONE’s benefit? If their firmware was open source, I would certainly take a look at it…
Regardless, it’s not a hardware problem, it’s a software (firmware) problem. So no amount of chip replacement is going to help…
…and (re: The Server Farm) here’s a quick photo of one of my network racks. My File Server is at the top (blue raid drives) and down below is a Virtual Machine server (also blue drives) running several web sites, an email server, a couple of security engines, and a few other VM’s…
I’m not angry. Just not sure why some folks seem to imply I’m being “unreasonable” or doing something “unsupported” by using a Class-B network in my environment…
I found the problem with the controller. I’ve started a dialog with OMTech. Hopefully they can get some traction with Ruida.
