Em 27-01-2014 19:05, Why 42? The lists account. escreveu:
> FWIW, you don't have to out in the sticks (the backwoods?) to have
> a network problem:
>
>
> http://mina.naguib.ca/blog/2012/10/22/the-little-ssh-that-sometimes-couldnt.html
>
> However, as I understand it, in this case the TCP checksumming worked
> and protected the application from the corrupted data.
>
> Cheers,
> Robb.
>
I wasn't exactly in the woods, but I had a 600Kbps unreliable ADSL
connection that would send the packets. But the latency and corruption
was so severe that TLS handshakes would take too long. And even if
complete, the connection wouldn't sustain itself. Anyway, the UDP vpn
improved things quite a bit. This due, well, to UDP of course, and to
the dynamic compression, reducing the amount of data sent to the wire.
This case you pointed, the TCP checksumming was doing it's job.
Successfully protecting the application. This kind of things, where bits
"randomly" flip, proves that computer science can be anything but an
EXACT science. That's one of the reasons why the machines will
(hopefully) always need humans.
Cheers,
--
Giancarlo Razzolini
GPG: 4096R/77B981BC
