On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 8:03 PM, Heath Jones <hj1...@gmail.com> wrote: > My point here is it IS possible to transfer just a hash and counter value > and effectively generate identical data at the remote end. > The limit that will be hit is the difficulty of generating and comparing > hash values with current processing power. > > I'm proposing iterating through generated data up until the actual data. > It's not even a storage issue, as once you have incremented the data you > don't need to store old data or hash values - just the counter. No massive > hash tables. > > It's a CPU issue. >
i'd note it took you many more packets than my example of roughly the same thing. if you really want to save bandwidth, my 1 packet answer is the best answer.
