| ??? 06/20/06 17:47 Read: times |
#118633 - never Responding to: ???'s previous message |
If you really need to rx them all, I think 2-way is preferrred.
Sorry, Grant, I disagree: "If you really need to rx them all, I KNOW 2-way is REQIURED" How can you ever have any trust that a transmisson was succesful without an acknowledge. Erik |
| Topic | Author | Date |
| Buffer management optimalization | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Simple things first ... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| You can use circular buffer | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Fragmentation problem... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| all methods have some problems | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Start of package or End of package | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Packages explanation | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Individual buffers | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Good Idea | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| New packages | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| hash table unefective | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| why keep that many | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Reason of 5 or more buffer | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Protocol specifics | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| One way protocol | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| One way protocol | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| never | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Definition of need | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Grant, I agree with what you post re thi | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Simply reason why one way transmission | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
then why not just do it the easy way | 01/01/70 00:00 |