[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [lwip-users] lwip 1.4.1 bug-fix release
|
From: |
Bill Auerbach |
|
Subject: |
Re: [lwip-users] lwip 1.4.1 bug-fix release |
|
Date: |
Fri, 17 Feb 2012 08:31:40 -0500 |
>That maximum size of a UDP datagram should only be limited by the
>protocol and your resources, so 64K should work, yes.
With UDP being unreliable, that implies that one or more fragments could be
dropped in a large UDP send, right?
Bill
- Re: [lwip-users] lwip 1.4.1 bug-fix release, Mason, 2012/02/08
- Re: [lwip-users] lwip 1.4.1 bug-fix release, address@hidden, 2012/02/09
- Re: [lwip-users] lwip 1.4.1 bug-fix release, Zayaz Volk, 2012/02/16
- Re: [lwip-users] lwip 1.4.1 bug-fix release, address@hidden, 2012/02/16
- Re: [lwip-users] lwip 1.4.1 bug-fix release, Zayaz Volk, 2012/02/16
- Re: [lwip-users] lwip 1.4.1 bug-fix release, Zayaz Volk, 2012/02/16
- Re: [lwip-users] lwip 1.4.1 bug-fix release, Simon Goldschmidt, 2012/02/17
- Re: [lwip-users] lwip 1.4.1 bug-fix release,
Bill Auerbach <=
- Re: [lwip-users] lwip 1.4.1 bug-fix release, Kieran Mansley, 2012/02/18
- Re: [lwip-users] lwip 1.4.1 bug-fix release, Zayaz Volk, 2012/02/19
- [lwip-users] Fragmented datagrams, Mason, 2012/02/20