FWIW, this is not the same discussion as far as I am concerned.
The previous discussion was about what reader is best for Hebrew book. This
one is about how to read Hebrew on a Kindle 2. I am not going to buy eVrit,
nor any book with DRM on it, if I can help it.
On Sat, Jun 25, 2011 at 11:01 PM,
On Jul 3, 2011, at 2:39 PM, Oleg Goldshmidt wrote:
No, Geoff, I am not missing that. What you are saying is that the 50%
loss is over the whole path that includes numerous "autonomous
systems" (AS), and not all of it may occur inside the ISP's network.
yes.
While this is obviously correct,
On Jul 3, 2011, at 12:39 PM, Tzafrir Cohen wrote:
FTP? TFTP?
You're right, I think I confused the two. Regular FTP uses TCP.
Geoff.
--
Geoffrey S. Mendelson, N3OWJ/4X1GM
Making your enemy reliant on software you support is the best revenge.
__
On Sun, Jul 3, 2011 at 11:23 AM, geoffrey mendelson
wrote:
> However Oleg, you are missing an important bit of information. Since there
> is no such thing as an "internet", one ISP can not be assumed to be at all
> like another. In the real world, such things are determined by how good the
> conn
Hello,
I'm looking for freelancers (more then one) that are Linux system guys.
The job is to help me provide SLA to my clients as a backup for myself.
The people I'm looking for need to be able to provide receipts on the
payment, and are עוסק מורשה/פטור (Don't know how to explain it in English).
On Sun, Jul 03, 2011 at 08:25:27AM +0300, geoffrey mendelson wrote:
> HTTP was built around TCP because the designers wanted 100% reliablilty
> instead of (possible) better performance.
>
> FTP was built on neither. The FTP protocol uses UDP, but includes a
> rudimentry implementation of the sa
On Jul 3, 2011, at 10:25 AM, Oleg Goldshmidt wrote:
We are all familiar with UDP vs. TCP tradeoff, but I think it is quite
irrelevant in the context. The OP sees 50% packet loss through ISP#1
and zero packet loss through ISP#2. I do not think that one can claim
that 50% loss is "normal" for UDP
We are all familiar with UDP vs. TCP tradeoff, but I think it is quite
irrelevant in the context. The OP sees 50% packet loss through ISP#1
and zero packet loss through ISP#2. I do not think that one can claim
that 50% loss is "normal" for UDP and the network works "as designed".
The "upper" TCP wi
On Sun, Jul 03, 2011, geoffrey mendelson wrote about "Re: UDP packets loss at
Israeli ISPs during peak hours":
> That's 10 years old. Even then it was questionable, UDP packets were
> dropped by ISPs all over the world when congested. That's why I worded
The "expected" behavior is for the IP
