Why TCP is so unreliable?
-
@Gąska said in The Linux command line sucks:
@bb36e said in The Linux command line sucks:
they said they just copy everything over LAN when they need to share files between computers..
The only reason I use USB drives is because networking on Windows is so unreliable.
TCP was supposed to make things reliable, and resend lost packets and whatnot. So, why is everything so shitty when we are in an unreliable connection? TCP should be abstracting away all of it's shitness, and yet I see myself canceling and resending stuff because some packet is lost in the way. One guess is shitty ISPs forging connection resets, but I don't think that is all of it.
-
@sockpuppet7 said in Why TCP is so unreliable?:
@Gąska said in The Linux command line sucks:
@bb36e said in The Linux command line sucks:
they said they just copy everything over LAN when they need to share files between computers..
The only reason I use USB drives is because networking on Windows is so unreliable.
TCP was supposed to make things reliable, and resend lost packets and whatnot. So, why is everything so shitty when we are in an unreliable connection? TCP should be abstracting away all of it's shitness, and yet I see myself canceling and resending stuff because some packet is lost in the way. One guess is shitty ISPs forging connection resets, but I don't think that is all of it.
What does a Wireshark look like? It should be reliable even with pretty massive loss. I've seen a weird issue before where a malfunctioning router was duplicating some packets and that did screw things right up.
-
@cursorkeys I don't think there is anything abnormal with my connection, and looking at wireshark would be work.
-
@sockpuppet7 said in Why TCP is so unreliable?:
People today (statistically) want instant (or nearly so) gratification instead of investing.
Ah, the good ol' times... kids these days, and uphill both ways, and get off your lawn. Your @boomzilla is showing. Come back when you've got real arguments.
Then see...
@sockpuppet7 said in Why TCP is so unreliable?:
@cursorkeys I don't think there is anything abnormal with my connection, and looking at wireshark would be work.
But perhaps more importantly, please pay attention to the fact that I did not include any age qualifier in my statement about not wanting to invest to achieve goals....
-
@sockpuppet7 you got me completely wrong. It's not connection that's unreliable. It's configuration. You know, computer names, workgroups, network shares, permissions, network types (home/office/public), security options... At some point, I just completely gave up trying to configure local network and just run around with USB drives.
On the other hand, on Arch Linux, I just
sudo systemctl start sshdand I can do whatever I want.
-
@gąska said in Why TCP is so unreliable?:
At some point, I just completely gave up trying to configure local network and just run around with USB drives.
It depends on how much data you're moving relative to available bandwidth, and how regularly. Sometimes it is best to use a remote mount and ship the data that way (there's a whole bunch of ways to do it) and sometimes running around with a disk is better.
Getting SMB mounts (or sshfs if you're going unix-to-unix) working can be annoying, but it's mostly a one-off annoyance.
-
@dkf said in Why TCP is so unreliable?:
or sshfs if you're going unix-to-unix
There are some SSHFS tools for Windows that are very easy to setup and work very well. I used such setup at work for several years. But that's only a client, so one of the end points still has to be a Unix (unless you can setup SSH server on Windows. I can't.)
-
@gąska said in Why TCP is so unreliable?:
There are some SSHFS tools for Windows that are very easy to setup and work very well.
Last time we tried, they had a nasty tendency to crumble horribly when the network configuration changed. In our case, it was the server's network configuration that was changing (
) but using it on a laptop and moving around was also troublesome. The issue was when either end of the network connection changed (and no, IP address is not the only way that can happen; our servers had problems because of ARP smartass-ness) the underlying SSH connection would start dropping packets like it was going out of fashion and eventually time out, yet the tools wouldn't reconnect. And the timeouts wouldn't be detected for a long time by default. I figured out eventually how to make that work reliably when the client end was Linux (it required some relatively esoteric options at both the ssh and sshfs levels to enable aggressive “pinging” in ssh and to tell sshfs to proactively reconnect with a root-provided passwordless key) but I have no idea how to configure that stuff on any other platform; IIRC, I reexported the mount via samba on that system so that my users could stop caring.And I've lost my notes on what exactly to do for all this as I don't work on that project any more. ;)
-
Hey @blakeyrat, I created a new topic, like you recommend, but then people kept talking about the original topic. If I posted about TCP in the original topic, I bet it would have derailed it. There is no winning with those guys.
-
@dkf said in Why TCP is so unreliable?:
Getting SMB mounts (or sshfs if you're going unix-to-unix) working can be annoying, but it's mostly a one-off annoyance.
Yeah. There's also a lot of bad information about SMB configuration around. Took a bit of screwing around with the options (and mostly ignoring suggestions from SO/ubuntu/...) to get it into a usable shape. That said, I can now maintain ~110MB/s to my ARM-based file server, i.e., it actually maxes out the gigabit ethernet.
Back to the topic, kinda. For me, the problems have always been related to Wifi. It just seems to be impossible to set up a somewhat reliable Wifi network.
-
@gąska said in Why TCP is so unreliable?:
It's not connection that's unreliable. It's configuration. You know, computer names, workgroups, network shares, permissions, network types (home/office/public), security options.
Yes, IME Windows computers on a home network are extremely finicky. Occasionally firewall settings change or something (which could be a 3rd party software problem). I'm not a network and have no desire to be one, especially if it means spending more time in the MS ecosystem (which is what my kids and wife use).
-
@cursorkeys said in Why TCP is so unreliable?:
What does a Wireshark look like?
Something like this:
-
@dkf said in Why TCP is so unreliable?:
and sometimes running around with a disk is better.
Never underestimate the bandwidth of a station wagon full of tapes on the highway. Petabyte packet sizes should be achievable nowadays; I wouldn't even be too surprised if you can pack an exabyte in the trunk.
-
@cvi said in Why TCP is so unreliable?:
It just seems to be impossible to set up a somewhat reliable Wifi network.
it can be done, it is just expensive to buy the equipment.
-
@pleegwat said in Why TCP is so unreliable?:
Never underestimate the bandwidth of a station wagon full of tapes on the highway. Petabyte packet sizes should be achievable nowadays; I wouldn't even be too surprised if you can pack an exabyte in the trunk.
Bandwidth is great, but the ping time is horrible. It's all about the tradeoffs.
-
@masonwheeler said in Why TCP is so unreliable?:
Bandwidth is great, but the ping time is horrible. It's all about the tradeoffs.
Well, one could always use a McLaren to cut down on the ping time.....
-
@masonwheeler said in Why TCP is so unreliable?:
ping time is horrible
Horrible ping is the reason TCP starts sucking in the first place, since it thinks that somehow the network as a whole is the reason it's failing and swiftly backs off severely.
-
@tsaukpaetra said in Why TCP is so unreliable?:
Horrible ping is the reason TCP starts sucking in the first place
Uh, no? Ping is ICMP. If you mean congestion control is why TCP starts sucking, then maybe.
-
@gąska Which Windows SSHFS tools do you like?
-
@captain I googled "sshfs windows" back in 2014 and found one with a cute yellow blowfish icon. I'm pretty sure it was named "SSHFS for Windows".
-
@thecpuwizard said in Why TCP is so unreliable?:
@masonwheeler said in Why TCP is so unreliable?:
Bandwidth is great, but the ping time is horrible. It's all about the tradeoffs.
Well, one could always use a McLaren to cut down on the ping time.....
And bandwidth. Tradeoffs, tradeoffs everywhere...
-
@gąska Nah bandwidth is no problem. Some highways have 8 lanes.
-
@jazzyjosh the only 8-lane I know is the ever-jammed I-90 near downtown Chicago.
-
@gąska Ever been to Buenos Aires? It's got an actual city street (ie. not a highway) that big:
The avenue has up to seven lanes in each direction and is flanked on either side by parallel streets of two lanes each. Through the centre of the avenue runs one of the city's Metrobus (Buenos Aires) (Bus rapid transit) corridors, which stretches 3 kilometres (1.9 mi) and was inaugurated in July 2013.
...
Crossing the avenue at street level often requires a few minutes, as all intersections have traffic lights. Under normal walking speed, it takes pedestrians normally two to three green lights to cross it.
I can personally attest to the truth of this. It actually has dedicated pedestrian stopping points in the middle of the road, because practicality requires them; you just can't make it across on a single light.
-
@pleegwat said in Why TCP is so unreliable?:
@dkf said in Why TCP is so unreliable?:
and sometimes running around with a disk is better.
Never underestimate the bandwidth of a station wagon full of tapes on the highway. Petabyte packet sizes should be achievable nowadays; I wouldn't even be too surprised if you can pack an exabyte in the trunk.
xkcd-what-if needs to rework the math now that 4TB SSDs are a thing...
-
@dcon said in Why TCP is so unreliable?:
now that 4TB SSDs are a thing..
I might consider the 12TB HDDs - much lower cost...
-
@pleegwat said in Why TCP is so unreliable?:
Never underestimate the bandwidth of a station wagon full of tapes on the highway.
Two words: shipping containers.
-
Why are you surprised TCP is do unreliable? It's right there in the name.
Totally Unreliable Protocol
-
@lorne-kates That spells TUP.
-
@pie_flavor said in Why TCP is so unreliable?:
@lorne-kates That spells TUP.
And now you know just how unreliable the protocol is.
-
@lorne-kates said in Why TCP is so unreliable?:
Why are you surprised TCP is do unreliable? It's right there in the name.
Totally Unreliable Protocol
There's also UDP:
Completely Disasterous Protocol
-
@dkf What kind of data can you possibly be shipping that the lot of it doesn't fit on a standard pallet?
-
@pleegwat said in Why TCP is so unreliable?:
What kind of data can you possibly be shipping that the lot of it doesn't fit on a standard pallet?
I was thinking about the SKA.
-
@pleegwat said in Why TCP is so unreliable?:
@dkf said in Why TCP is so unreliable?:
and sometimes running around with a disk is better.
Never underestimate the bandwidth of a station wagon full of tapes on the highway. Petabyte packet sizes should be achievable nowadays; I wouldn't even be too surprised if you can pack an exabyte in the trunk.
You should really use an established standard:
Fairly sure you could strap quite a few SSDs to a pigeon...European pigeon obviously, and you'd have to remove the coconut first.
-
I would tell you a joke about UDP, but you might not get it.
-
@helix said in Why TCP is so unreliable?:
I would tell you a joke about UDP, but you might not get it.
I only got half of it, and you didn't even care
UDP joke! Who's there? Knock knock,
-
@dkf said in Why TCP is so unreliable?:
@pleegwat said in Why TCP is so unreliable?:
Never underestimate the bandwidth of a station wagon full of tapes on the highway.
Two words: shipping containers.
Keep in mind that Monroe was quoting a much older statement, usually attributed to Andrew Tannenbaum (of Minix fame) but which even he averred was an already old phrase.
According to Wicked-Pedo, it was already in print in 1971:
The first USENET citation is July 16, 1985 and it was widely considered an old joke already.
There's a lot of band-width in a station wagon.
-Gruenberger, Fred (1971). Computing: A Second Course. San Francisco: Canfield Press. p. 138. ISBN 978-0063834057. Retrieved 24 January 2017.
Other alleged speakers included Tom Reidel, Warren Jackson, or Bob Sutterfield. The station wagon transporting magnetic tapes is the canonical version,[citation needed] but variants using trucks or Boeing 747s or C-5s and later storage technologies such as CD-ROMs, DVDs, Blu-Rays, or SD Cards have frequently appeared.
I was thinking it was from Alan Perlis for some reason, probably for that same reason people mis-attribute so many things to Shakespeare and Twain (i.e., the number of pithy epigrams that are from them is so big that it is plausible to attribute almost anything to them.)
-
@scholrlea said in Why TCP is so unreliable?:
Keeping in mind that Monroe was quoting a much older statement, usually attributed to Andrew Tannenbaum (of Minix fame) but which even he averred was an already old phrase.
Keeping in mind that I already knew that…
-
@dkf Fair enough,
-
@pie_flavor said in Why TCP is so unreliable?:
That spells TUP.
Oh, shit, somebody pushed over the C!
-
@cvi said in Why TCP is so unreliable?:
somebody pushed over the C!
Now the water's going to get everywhere!
-
@cursorkeys said in Why TCP is so unreliable?:
@pleegwat said in Why TCP is so unreliable?:
@dkf said in Why TCP is so unreliable?:
and sometimes running around with a disk is better.
Never underestimate the bandwidth of a station wagon full of tapes on the highway. Petabyte packet sizes should be achievable nowadays; I wouldn't even be too surprised if you can pack an exabyte in the trunk.
You should really use an established standard:
Fairly sure you could strap quite a few SSDs to a pigeon...European pigeon obviously, and you'd have to remove the coconut first.
Rather than SSDs it might be more effective with these:
Integral unveils 512GB microSD card, coming this February
The first 512GB microSD card was announced in 2015, but you still can't buy one. Here's hoping the story of this one is better.
-
-
@jbert It's extremely dangerous and may attack at any time.
-
@pleegwat said in Why TCP is so unreliable?:
@dkf said in Why TCP is so unreliable?:
and sometimes running around with a disk is better.
Never underestimate the bandwidth of a station wagon full of tapes on the highway. Petabyte packet sizes should be achievable nowadays; I wouldn't even be too surprised if you can pack an exabyte in the trunk.
A couple years ago, I bought about 200 TB of disk, and I could carry it around just fine (24 8-TB disks). 1 petabyte would fit in the trunk of my car easily, and I don't even own a station wagon any more. It will probably be a while before it reaches 1 exabyte, but a station wagon could probably hold 25 to 50 petabytes.
-
@jbert said in Why TCP is so unreliable?:
@hungrier But... what...
With that data density it's going to explode any minute now, isn't it?
Crazy things happen when you pack bits that tightly. Their electrons repel each other like magnets, so as your storage fills up you're also adding a ton of potential energy to its electric field. I almost died last week when I dropped my phone and the SD card was full.
-
@dragnslcr for a real world example of the station wagon full of tapes, see this:
Offline Data Transfer Device, Petabyte - AWS Snowball - AWS
AWS Snowball is a petabyte-scale data transport service that uses secure devices to transfer large amounts of data into and out of the AWS Cloud. Snowball addresses challenges like high network costs, long transfer times, and security concerns to migrate data as efficiently as possible.
-
@mott555 you joke, but rowhammer is a real thing.
-
The real danger of having so many bits close together is that you can open a virtual portal to L-space, and then the librarians will be on you like a ton of bricks
-
@mott555 said in Why TCP is so unreliable?:
Crazy things happen when you pack bits that tightly. Their electrons repel each other like magnets, so as your storage fills up you're also adding a ton of potential energy to its electric field. I almost died last week when I dropped my phone and the SD card was full.
That only happens if you are not careful in balancing the distributions of 1's and 0's on the physical media.
Avenida 9 de Julio - Wikipedia
