By using this site, you agree to our updated Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Manage your Cookies Settings.
443,310 Members | 1,466 Online
Bytes IT Community
+ Ask a Question
Need help? Post your question and get tips & solutions from a community of 443,310 IT Pros & Developers. It's quick & easy.

thousands of request in one port per second

P: n/a
Greetings All,

i think this is the right group to post this question.

i am working on client server model. in this model the client is
sending request in thousands in number. for example per sec around
2000 to 3000 request is coming. so the server is listening in the udp
port. after some time the most of the request is dropped. how can
manage this problem. is the multi threading will help ? but it is UDP
port i dont know how handle this request in multi threading model. or
is there any way i can handle this problem ?

thanks in advance

Prakash
Oct 9 '08 #1
Share this Question
Share on Google+
29 Replies


P: n/a
Praki wrote:
>
i think this is the right group to post this question.

i am working on client server model. in this model the client is
sending request in thousands in number. for example per sec
around 2000 to 3000 request is coming. so the server is listening
in the udp port. after some time the most of the request is
dropped. how can manage this problem. is the multi threading will
help ? but it is UDP port i dont know how handle this request in
multi threading model. or is there any way i can handle this
problem ?
Wrong newsgroup. We handle standard C, as described in the C
standard. The language contains none of clients, servers,
threading, UDP, etc. You probably need a newsgroup that deals with
your particular system.

--
[mail]: Chuck F (cbfalconer at maineline dot net)
[page]: <http://cbfalconer.home.att.net>
Try the download section.
Oct 9 '08 #2

P: n/a
On 9 Oct 2008 at 14:32, Praki wrote:
i think this is the right group to post this question.
It's a perfectly appropriate group. Please ignore CBF, who is a known
troll, and senile to boot.
i am working on client server model. in this model the client is
sending request in thousands in number. for example per sec around
2000 to 3000 request is coming. so the server is listening in the udp
port. after some time the most of the request is dropped. how can
manage this problem. is the multi threading will help ? but it is UDP
port i dont know how handle this request in multi threading model. or
is there any way i can handle this problem ?
If dropped packets is a serious problem, you shouldn't be using UDP.

You could try increasing the size of the receiving buffer, e.g.:

int bufsize = 1<<16;
setsockopt(fd, SOL_SOCKET, SO_RCVBUF, &bufsize, sizeof bufsize);

If that fails, you could maintain your own buffer: your main thread
could just transfer data from the socket buffer to your buffer, and then
a worker thread could process items from your buffer. But ultimately, if
data is coming in faster than you can process it, then any buffer will
eventually overflow...

Oct 9 '08 #3

P: n/a
Praki <vi***************@gmail.comwrites:
Greetings All,

i think this is the right group to post this question.
[...]

I'm afraid it really isn't. You'll bet better information from a
larger pool of experts in a group that deals with your operating
system, most likely comp.unix.programmer if you're on Linux or some
other Unix-like system, or comp.os.ms-windows.programmer.win32 or one
of the microsoft.* groups if you're on MS Windows.

I'm sorry that you've run into Antoninus Twink, a troll who sometimes
pretends to be helpful. If he were really interested in helping you
solve your problem rather than disrupting this newsgroup, he probably
would have told you about the existence of other more appropriate
groups.

--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) ks***@mib.org <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
Nokia
"We must do something. This is something. Therefore, we must do this."
-- Antony Jay and Jonathan Lynn, "Yes Minister"
Oct 9 '08 #4

P: n/a
CBFalconer <cb********@yahoo.comwrites:
Praki wrote:
>>
i think this is the right group to post this question.

i am working on client server model. in this model the client is
sending request in thousands in number. for example per sec
around 2000 to 3000 request is coming. so the server is listening
in the udp port. after some time the most of the request is
dropped. how can manage this problem. is the multi threading will
help ? but it is UDP port i dont know how handle this request in
multi threading model. or is there any way i can handle this
problem ?

Wrong newsgroup. We handle standard C, as described in the C
standard. The language contains none of clients, servers,
threading, UDP, etc. You probably need a newsgroup that deals with
your particular system.
Don't be ridiculous. Many aspects of these things can be done in standard
C and this is a good place to ask C programmers of their thoughts and
experiences. The fact that you have never programmed on a real
professional C project does not mean the rest here have not.

Oct 10 '08 #5

P: n/a
On Oct 9, 7:32*am, Praki <visitprakashin...@gmail.comwrote:
Greetings All,

i think this is the right group to post this question.
Probably not. I suggest news:comp.soft-sys.ace if you don't mind C++
solutions.
Using ACE would allow a fast, portable and reliable approach.
Building clients and servers with ACE is as easy as falling off a log.
i am working on client server model. in this model the client is
sending request in thousands in number. for example per sec around
2000 to 3000 request is coming. so the server is listening in the udp
port. after some time the most of the request is dropped. how can
manage this problem. is the multi threading will help *? but it is UDP
port i dont know how handle this request in multi threading model. or
is there *any way i can handle this problem ?
UDP gives no guarantees about delivery. If you need to scale lots of
requests, I suggest looking into memcached.
The memcached tool set is also a little unreliable (because it is a
cache), but it will scale to any load you can imagine.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memcached
Oct 10 '08 #6

P: n/a
Praki wrote:
Greetings All,

i think this is the right group to post this question.

i am working on client server model. in this model the client is
sending request in thousands in number. for example per sec around
2000 to 3000 request is coming. so the server is listening in the udp
port. after some time the most of the request is dropped. how can
manage this problem. is the multi threading will help ? but it is UDP
port i dont know how handle this request in multi threading model. or
is there any way i can handle this problem ?
If your server can't keep up, you should profile the code and see where
the bottlenecks are. It you fix those and it still can't keep up, use
faster hardware. If that can't keep up, use more cores and threading.
If that can't keep up, use a more appropriate protocol.

Or save a lot of time and do the last first.

--
Ian Collins
Oct 10 '08 #7

P: n/a
user923005 wrote:
>
UDP gives no guarantees about delivery. If you need to scale lots of
requests, I suggest looking into memcached.
The memcached tool set is also a little unreliable (because it is a
cache), but it will scale to any load you can imagine.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memcached
While memcached is a good tool, if the load is continuous and the server
can't keep up, the cache will fill and packets will continue to be dropped.

--
Ian Collins
Oct 10 '08 #8

P: n/a
Richard wrote:
>
Don't be ridiculous. Many aspects of these things can be done in standard
C and this is a good place to ask C programmers of their thoughts and
experiences.
OK, put up or shut up. What are your thoughts and experiences? Or are
you just here to snipe form the sidelines?

--
Ian Collins
Oct 10 '08 #9

P: n/a
On Oct 9, 5:46*pm, Ian Collins <ian-n...@hotmail.comwrote:
user923005 wrote:
UDP gives no guarantees about delivery. *If you need to scale lots of
requests, I suggest looking into memcached.
The memcached tool set is also a little unreliable (because it is a
cache), but it will scale to any load you can imagine.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memcached

While memcached is a good tool, if the load is continuous and the server
can't keep up, the cache will fill and packets will continue to be dropped.
From the memcached FAQ:

"Finally, memcached itself is implemented as a non-blocking event-
based server. This is an architecture used to solve the C10K problem
and scale like crazy.

What's the big benefit for all this?
Carefully read the above entry (How does memcached work?). The big
benefit, when dealing with giant systems, is memcached's ability to
massively scale out. Since the client does one layer of hashing, it
becomes entirely trivial to add dozens of nodes to the cluster.
There's no interconnect to overload, or multicast protocol to implode.
It Just Works. Run out of memory? Add a few more nodes. Run out of
CPU? Add a few more nodes. Have some spare RAM here and there? Add
nodes!

It's incredibly easy to build on memcached's basic principles to
implement many different kinds of caching architectures. Hopefully
detailed elsewhere in the FAQ."

Oct 10 '08 #10

P: n/a
Ian Collins wrote:
Richard wrote:
>Don't be ridiculous. Many aspects of these things can be done in
standard C and this is a good place to ask C programmers of their
thoughts and experiences.

OK, put up or shut up. What are your thoughts and experiences?
Or are you just here to snipe form the sidelines?
Your second sentence is accurate. This is the troll Richard who is
PLONKED here. He tries to be hard to plonk with that one word
name.

--
[mail]: Chuck F (cbfalconer at maineline dot net)
[page]: <http://cbfalconer.home.att.net>
Try the download section.
Oct 10 '08 #11

P: n/a
user923005 wrote:
On Oct 9, 5:46 pm, Ian Collins <ian-n...@hotmail.comwrote:
>user923005 wrote:
>>UDP gives no guarantees about delivery. If you need to scale lots of
requests, I suggest looking into memcached.
The memcached tool set is also a little unreliable (because it is a
cache), but it will scale to any load you can imagine.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memcached
While memcached is a good tool, if the load is continuous and the server
can't keep up, the cache will fill and packets will continue to be dropped.

From the memcached FAQ:

It Just Works. Run out of memory? Add a few more nodes. Run out of
CPU? Add a few more nodes. Have some spare RAM here and there? Add
nodes!
I'm aware of that, but if data arrives even marginally faster than it
can be processed, an infinitely large cache will eventually be required.

--
Ian Collins
Oct 10 '08 #12

P: n/a
Richard<rg****@gmail.comwrites:
Keith Thompson <ks***@mib.orgwrites:
>Praki <vi***************@gmail.comwrites:
>>Greetings All,
i think this is the right group to post this question.
[...]

I'm afraid it really isn't. You'll bet better information from a
larger pool of experts in a group that deals with your operating
system, most likely comp.unix.programmer if you're on Linux or some
other Unix-like system, or comp.os.ms-windows.programmer.win32 or one
of the microsoft.* groups if you're on MS Windows.
[snip]
If someone asks you the way somewhere do you tell them to f*** off and
consult a certified map in the hands of a professional orienteering
scout or do you say "it's in that direction"?
Quotation edited for content.

If I happen to know the way, I'll tell them. Sometimes I'll say
something like "It's over that way somewhere; go to that corner and
then ask somebody else". But note that a one-on-one a personal
interaction is not a newsgroup, and directions to the nearest
Starbucks tend to be a lot simpler than answers to technical
questions.

If I don't know the way, but I happen to know that the group of a
dozen people standing a few feet away are expert tour guides with GPS
units, I'll suggest that they go ask one of them. (Metaphor alert:
the "expert tour guides" correspond to the system-specific newsgroup
full of people who know more about, in this case, networking than I
do.)

If somebody asks me for directions in a shopping mall, and I happen to
be standing next to a detailed map of the mall, I'll point to the map
(but I'll be willing to help out if they have trouble reading it,
assuming I have the time).

Antoninus Twink, for whatever reason, is perfectly willing to give
incorrect or incomplete answers, rather than being honest enough to
tell the questioner where to find the real experts. He posts a lot
about Unix programming; it's interesting to note that he rarely posts
in the comp.unix.* groups, where his answers could be checked.

You, on the other hand, rarely contribute anything here but abuse.
You're such a big fan of answering questions, why do you so rarely
answer questions?

--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) ks***@mib.org <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
Nokia
"We must do something. This is something. Therefore, we must do this."
-- Antony Jay and Jonathan Lynn, "Yes Minister"
Oct 10 '08 #13

P: n/a
On Oct 10, 7:38*am, Keith Thompson <ks...@mib.orgwrote:
Richard<rgr...@gmail.comwrites:
Keith Thompson <ks...@mib.orgwrites:
Praki <visitprakashin...@gmail.comwrites:
Greetings All,
i think this is the right group to post this question.
[...]
I'm afraid it really isn't. *You'll bet better information from a
larger pool of experts in a group that deals with your operating
system, most likely comp.unix.programmer if you're on Linux or some
other Unix-like system, or comp.os.ms-windows.programmer.win32 or one
of the microsoft.* groups if you're on MS Windows.
[snip]
If someone asks you the way somewhere do you tell them to f*** off and
consult a certified map in the hands of a professional orienteering
scout or do you say "it's in that direction"?

Quotation edited for content.

If I happen to know the way, I'll tell them. *Sometimes I'll say
something like "It's over that way somewhere; go to that corner and
then ask somebody else". *But note that a one-on-one a personal
interaction is not a newsgroup, and directions to the nearest
Starbucks tend to be a lot simpler than answers to technical
questions.

If I don't know the way, but I happen to know that the group of a
dozen people standing a few feet away are expert tour guides with GPS
units, I'll suggest that they go ask one of them. *(Metaphor alert:
the "expert tour guides" correspond to the system-specific newsgroup
full of people who know more about, in this case, networking than I
do.)

If somebody asks me for directions in a shopping mall, and I happen to
be standing next to a detailed map of the mall, I'll point to the map
(but I'll be willing to help out if they have trouble reading it,
assuming I have the time).

Antoninus Twink, for whatever reason, is perfectly willing to give
incorrect or incomplete answers, rather than being honest enough to
tell the questioner where to find the real experts. *He posts a lot
about Unix programming; it's interesting to note that he rarely posts
in the comp.unix.* groups, where his answers could be checked.

You, on the other hand, rarely contribute anything here but abuse.
You're such a big fan of answering questions, why do you so rarely
answer questions?

--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) ks...@mib.org *<http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
Nokia
"We must do something. *This is something. *Therefore, we must do this."
* * -- Antony Jay and Jonathan Lynn, "Yes Minister"
Hi All,

I chose this group because my implementation going to be in c and also
most of the language which intern uses C to work regarding the socket
programing. So i want to develop my application in C language and
Linux Platform.I cannot change the Protocol because it UDP based SNMP
Protocol.i have respone like a device in SNMP protocol so i cannot
change the protocol. If i act like a thousand device there many be
thousand request to the server at a time.if i ack like a 2000 device
there will be 2000 request at a time. so i want to handle all the
request in UDP protocol. if the server takes long time then client
will go off saying time out. this is my problem.

Prakash
Oct 10 '08 #14

P: n/a
Praki wrote:
>
Hi All,

I chose this group because my implementation going to be in c and also
most of the language which intern uses C to work regarding the socket
programing. So i want to develop my application in C language and
Linux Platform.I cannot change the Protocol because it UDP based SNMP
Protocol.i have respone like a device in SNMP protocol so i cannot
change the protocol. If i act like a thousand device there many be
thousand request to the server at a time.if i ack like a 2000 device
there will be 2000 request at a time. so i want to handle all the
request in UDP protocol. if the server takes long time then client
will go off saying time out. this is my problem.
If your stated your problem, we wouldn't have wasted time with
inappropriate answers.

You have to either limit the number of devices, stagger the polling or
use a faster server.

That's about as far (and probably further) as we can go here. This
group is for C language questions, best send follow-ups to
comp.unix.programmer or a linux group, where questions like this are
topical.

--
Ian Collins
Oct 10 '08 #15

P: n/a
On Oct 10, 9:22*am, Ian Collins <ian-n...@hotmail.comwrote:
Praki wrote:
Hi All,
I chose this group because my implementation going to be in c and also
most of the language which intern uses C to work regarding the socket
programing. So i want to develop my application in C language and
Linux Platform.I cannot change the Protocol because it UDP based SNMP
Protocol.i have respone like a device in SNMP protocol so i cannot
change the protocol. If i act like a thousand device there many be
thousand request to the server at a time.if i ack like a 2000 device
there will be 2000 request at a time. so i want to handle all the
request in UDP protocol. if the server takes long time then client
will go off saying time out. this is my problem.

If your stated your problem, we wouldn't have wasted time with
inappropriate answers.

You have to either limit the number of devices, stagger the polling or
use a faster server.

That's about as far (and probably further) as we can go here. *This
group is for C language questions, best send follow-ups to
comp.unix.programmer or a linux group, where questions like this are
topical.

--
Ian Collins
I am sorry for that. is there any pointers for implemeting C threads
for UDP it would be helpfull for me

Thanks,
Praki
Oct 10 '08 #16

P: n/a
On Oct 10, 9:22*am, Ian Collins <ian-n...@hotmail.comwrote:
Praki wrote:
Hi All,
I chose this group because my implementation going to be in c and also
most of the language which intern uses C to work regarding the socket
programing. So i want to develop my application in C language and
Linux Platform.I cannot change the Protocol because it UDP based SNMP
Protocol.i have respone like a device in SNMP protocol so i cannot
change the protocol. If i act like a thousand device there many be
thousand request to the server at a time.if i ack like a 2000 device
there will be 2000 request at a time. so i want to handle all the
request in UDP protocol. if the server takes long time then client
will go off saying time out. this is my problem.

If your stated your problem, we wouldn't have wasted time with
inappropriate answers.

You have to either limit the number of devices, stagger the polling or
use a faster server.

That's about as far (and probably further) as we can go here. *This
group is for C language questions, best send follow-ups to
comp.unix.programmer or a linux group, where questions like this are
topical.

--
Ian Collins
I am sorry for that. is there any pointers for implemeting C threads
for UDP it would be helpfull for me

Thanks,
Praki
Oct 10 '08 #17

P: n/a
On Oct 10, 9:22*am, Ian Collins <ian-n...@hotmail.comwrote:
Praki wrote:
Hi All,
I chose this group because my implementation going to be in c and also
most of the language which intern uses C to work regarding the socket
programing. So i want to develop my application in C language and
Linux Platform.I cannot change the Protocol because it UDP based SNMP
Protocol.i have respone like a device in SNMP protocol so i cannot
change the protocol. If i act like a thousand device there many be
thousand request to the server at a time.if i ack like a 2000 device
there will be 2000 request at a time. so i want to handle all the
request in UDP protocol. if the server takes long time then client
will go off saying time out. this is my problem.

If your stated your problem, we wouldn't have wasted time with
inappropriate answers.

You have to either limit the number of devices, stagger the polling or
use a faster server.

That's about as far (and probably further) as we can go here. *This
group is for C language questions, best send follow-ups to
comp.unix.programmer or a linux group, where questions like this are
topical.

--
Ian Collins
I am sorry for that. is there any pointers for implemeting C threads
for UDP it would be helpfull for me

Thanks,
Praki
Oct 10 '08 #18

P: n/a
On Oct 10, 9:22*am, Ian Collins <ian-n...@hotmail.comwrote:
Praki wrote:
Hi All,
I chose this group because my implementation going to be in c and also
most of the language which intern uses C to work regarding the socket
programing. So i want to develop my application in C language and
Linux Platform.I cannot change the Protocol because it UDP based SNMP
Protocol.i have respone like a device in SNMP protocol so i cannot
change the protocol. If i act like a thousand device there many be
thousand request to the server at a time.if i ack like a 2000 device
there will be 2000 request at a time. so i want to handle all the
request in UDP protocol. if the server takes long time then client
will go off saying time out. this is my problem.

If your stated your problem, we wouldn't have wasted time with
inappropriate answers.

You have to either limit the number of devices, stagger the polling or
use a faster server.

That's about as far (and probably further) as we can go here. *This
group is for C language questions, best send follow-ups to
comp.unix.programmer or a linux group, where questions like this are
topical.

--
Ian Collins
I am sorry for that. is there any pointers for implemeting C threads
for UDP it would be helpfull for me

Thanks,
Praki
Oct 10 '08 #19

P: n/a
Praki <vi***************@gmail.comwrites:
On Oct 10, 9:22*am, Ian Collins <ian-n...@hotmail.comwrote:
>Praki wrote:
I chose this group because my implementation going to be in c and also
most of the language which intern uses C to work regarding the socket
programing. So i want to develop my application in C language and
Linux Platform.
[...]
>If your stated your problem, we wouldn't have wasted time with
inappropriate answers.

You have to either limit the number of devices, stagger the polling or
use a faster server.

That's about as far (and probably further) as we can go here. *This
group is for C language questions, best send follow-ups to
comp.unix.programmer or a linux group, where questions like this are
topical.

I am sorry for that. is there any pointers for implemeting C threads
for UDP it would be helpfull for me
Ask in comp.unix.programmer. comp.programming.threads might also be
helpful, but I'd try comp.unix.programmer.

Incidentally, you seem to be having some trouble with Google Groups;
your article appeared three times.

--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) ks***@mib.org <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
Nokia
"We must do something. This is something. Therefore, we must do this."
-- Antony Jay and Jonathan Lynn, "Yes Minister"
Oct 10 '08 #20

P: n/a
On 9 Oct, 21:26, Antoninus Twink <nos...@nospam.invalidwrote:
On *9 Oct 2008 at 14:32, Praki wrote:
i think this is the right group to post this question.
<snip>

both Richard <surnameand Twink are trolls who try to disrupt
this news group by posting (and encouraging the posting of)
responses to non-topical questions.

Please ignore them

Oct 10 '08 #21

P: n/a
In article <ln************@nuthaus.mib.org>,
Keith Thompson <ks***@mib.orgwrote a bunch of his usual blather, full
of specious claims and other junk. I don't have time to hack it all to
bits at the moment, but he leads up to:
....
>You, on the other hand, rarely contribute anything here but abuse.
You're such a big fan of answering questions, why do you so rarely
answer questions?
Because if he did, he'd get the same kind of unabashed abuse that you
give Mr. Twink.

Newbies note: It is simply not possible to give real help in CLC, without
getting abused by the regs for your efforts.

Oct 10 '08 #22

P: n/a
Keith Thompson said:
Richard<rg****@gmail.comwrites:
>Keith Thompson <ks***@mib.orgwrites:
>>Praki <vi***************@gmail.comwrites:
Greetings All,
i think this is the right group to post this question.
[...]

I'm afraid it really isn't. You'll bet better information from a
larger pool of experts in a group that deals with your operating
system, most likely comp.unix.programmer if you're on Linux or some
other Unix-like system, or comp.os.ms-windows.programmer.win32 or one
of the microsoft.* groups if you're on MS Windows.
[snip]
>If someone asks you the way somewhere do you tell them to f*** off and
consult a certified map in the hands of a professional orienteering
scout or do you say "it's in that direction"?

Quotation edited for content.
<snip>
>
You, on the other hand, rarely contribute anything here but abuse.
You're such a big fan of answering questions, why do you so rarely
answer questions?
Presumably because he doesn't know the answers. Envying those who do, he
seeks to denigrate them at every opportunity. Whilst it is unfortunately
true that many clc regulars do sometimes post derogatory remarks, if you
look at the proportion of actual useful help (which we might call
"signal") to derogatory remarks ("noise"), that proportion is actually
pretty high for most of the people Richard Riley attacks, but his own S/N
ratio is vanishingly low.

It's called "hypocrisy". When he drops it and starts learning the language
well enough to teach it, I'll be glad to remove him from my killfile.
Until then, all his articles belong firmly in the bozo bin.

--
Richard Heathfield <http://www.cpax.org.uk>
Email: -http://www. +rjh@
Google users: <http://www.cpax.org.uk/prg/writings/googly.php>
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999
Oct 10 '08 #23

P: n/a
On 10 Oct 2008 at 12:44, Richard Heathfield wrote:
Presumably because he doesn't know the answers. Envying those who do,
he seeks to denigrate them at every opportunity.
[snip]
It's called "hypocrisy".
Once again, the needle on the irony-meter is spinning wildly out of
control.

Heathfield decries others for denigrating people who know more about C
than they do (maybe even enough to write a C compiler?...), then accuses
others of hypocrisy. Simply priceless.

Oct 10 '08 #24

P: n/a
In article <sl*******************@nospam.invalid>,
Antoninus Twink <no****@nospam.invalidwrote:
>On 10 Oct 2008 at 12:44, Richard Heathfield wrote:
>Presumably because he doesn't know the answers. Envying those who do,
he seeks to denigrate them at every opportunity.
[snip]
>It's called "hypocrisy".

Once again, the needle on the irony-meter is spinning wildly out of
control.

Heathfield decries others for denigrating people who know more about C
than they do (maybe even enough to write a C compiler?...), then accuses
others of hypocrisy. Simply priceless.
It boggles the mind, but it does make for good entertainment.

Oct 10 '08 #25

P: n/a
Praki wrote:
>
.... snip ...
>
I chose this group because my implementation going to be in c and
also most of the language which intern uses C to work regarding
the socket programing. So i want to develop my application in C
language and Linux Platform.I cannot change the Protocol because
it UDP based SNMP Protocol.i have respone like a device in SNMP
protocol so i cannot change the protocol. If i act like a thousand
device there many be thousand request to the server at a time.if
i ack like a 2000 device there will be 2000 request at a time. so
i want to handle all the request in UDP protocol. if the server
takes long time then client will go off saying time out. this is
my problem.
However the C language is defined by the C standard (C99 markers
below), not by what additions and systems have been installed on
specific systems. In particular the internetworking protocals are
totally independant of C, and vice-versa. If you want help with
them pick a newsgroup that discusses them, or a newsgroup that
discusses your particular system.

Some useful references about C:
<http://www.ungerhu.com/jxh/clc.welcome.txt>
<http://c-faq.com/ (C-faq)
<http://benpfaff.org/writings/clc/off-topic.html>
<http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n1256.pdf(C99)
<http://cbfalconer.home.att.net/download/n869_txt.bz2 (pre-C99)
<http://www.dinkumware.com/c99.aspx (C-library}
<http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/ (GNU docs)
<http://clc-wiki.net/wiki/C_community:comp.lang.c:Introduction>

--
[mail]: Chuck F (cbfalconer at maineline dot net)
[page]: <http://cbfalconer.home.att.net>
Try the download section.
Oct 10 '08 #26

P: n/a
On 10 Oct 2008 at 21:53, CBFalconer wrote:
In particular the internetworking protocals are totally independant of
C, and vice-versa.
Of course, this is nonsense.

The internet is built on C, and the fundamental networking or socket
structures that we take completely for granted today are tightly
interwoven with the C language.

Oct 10 '08 #27

P: n/a
On Oct 10, 11:21*pm, Antoninus Twink <nos...@nospam.invalidwrote:
On 10 Oct 2008 at 21:53, CBFalconer wrote:
In particular the internetworking protocals are totally independant of
C, and vice-versa.

Of course, this is nonsense.

The internet is built on C, and the fundamental networking or socket
structures that we take completely for granted today are tightly
interwoven with the C language.
TCP/IP is defined independently of the C langauge. You could
write TCP/IP software in FORTRAN (if you were feeling masochistic).
Sockets tend to be programmed in C but plenty of other
languages support sockets.

--
Nick Keighley
Oct 12 '08 #28

P: n/a
On Oct 10, 5:00 am, gaze...@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack)
wrote:
In article <lnhc7lmax0....@nuthaus.mib.org>,
Keith Thompson <ks...@mib.orgwrote a bunch of his usual blather, full
of specious claims and other junk. I don't have time to hack it all to
bits at the moment, but he leads up to:
...
You, on the other hand, rarely contribute anything here but abuse.
You're such a big fan of answering questions, why do you so rarely
answer questions?

Because if he did, he'd get the same kind of unabashed abuse that you
give Mr. Twink.

Newbies note: It is simply not possible to give real help in CLC, without
getting abused by the regs for your efforts.
I've never really gotten abused. I think the rules are pretty simple.

1)Post the C question in the C forum.

2)Make every effort clearly state your problem.
Oct 12 '08 #29

P: n/a
Nick Keighley wrote:
Antoninus Twink <nos...@nospam.invalidwrote:
>CBFalconer wrote:
>>In particular the internetworking protocals are totally
independant of C, and vice-versa.

Of course, this is nonsense.

The internet is built on C, and the fundamental networking or
socket structures that we take completely for granted today are
tightly interwoven with the C language.

TCP/IP is defined independently of the C langauge. You could
write TCP/IP software in FORTRAN (if you were feeling
masochistic). Sockets tend to be programmed in C but plenty of
other languages support sockets.
Nothing wrong with your post. I just want to suggest that when you
have to make such a post pointing out the faulty information
presented by Twink, you also mention his troll behaviour. This may
help avoid Twink getting some newbies confused.

--
[mail]: Chuck F (cbfalconer at maineline dot net)
[page]: <http://cbfalconer.home.att.net>
Try the download section.
Oct 13 '08 #30

This discussion thread is closed

Replies have been disabled for this discussion.