Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

It's TCP vs. RPC All over Again

systemsapproach.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 116 posts

Re: It's TCP vs. RPC All over Again

#61

Post by derefr »

cryptonector wrote: post #54
manv1 wrote: post #19

This paragraph is just wrong: "Another explanation is that the Internet has unnecessarily coupled the transport protocol with the rest of the RPC framework. Conflating the two naturally follows from the purpose-built examples I just gave: SMTP is bundled with MIME; SNMP is bundled with MIB; and HTTP is bundled with HTML. " I think at this point he's suffering from what old-timers used to call recto-cranial inversion.

Agreed. MIME came after SMTP, for example, and HTTP is used for all sorts of not-HTML-or-hyper-anything stuff. That statement smacks me of "wow, HTTP is a pretty good RPC, but too bad it's only/mainly for transporting HTML, shucks!". The name of the protocol is not very representative anymore either of how it's used or how anyone should use it. If HTTP fits the bill, then use it and move on.

And I keep saying that SMTP is a perfectly good message-queue broker message submission protocol (and POP a perfectly good message-queue broker:consumer protocol), but nobody ever listens. :P

Re: It's TCP vs. RPC All over Again

#62

Post by noselasd »

cryptonector wrote: post #50
cjsplat wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, but what is UDP bringing to the party then? The pseudoheader? A reasonable RPC layer could just layer on IP.

> Sure, but what is UDP bringing to the party then? Interoperability. It's been how many years since SCTP was published? How's that going?

You're likely interacting with SCTP every time you use a mobile phone, as it's in heavy use in the control plane of telecom networks. Outside that, not so much though.

Re: It's TCP vs. RPC All over Again

#63

Post by noselasd »

seanhunter wrote: post #58
nubinetwork wrote: post #34

I'd be happy if DNS and NTP would just get off their butts and switch to TCP. No, DoH doesn't count.

Normal DNS will switch to TCP for any large request and has done for quite some time.

Unless you're using the musl libc - which is in heavy use in conteainerized applications

Re: It's TCP vs. RPC All over Again

#64

Post by ithkuil »

noselasd wrote: post #62
cryptonector wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Sure, but what is UDP bringing to the party then? Interoperability. It's been how many years since SCTP was published? How's that going?

You're likely interacting with SCTP every time you use a mobile phone, as it's in heavy use in the control plane of telecom networks. Outside that, not so much though.

Yes but if my program on my laptop wants to talk to my program in my server somewhere out there, chances are the SCTP will be blocked by some piece of blinking furniture along the path.

Re: It's TCP vs. RPC All over Again

#65

Post by tleilaxu »

derefr wrote: post #61
cryptonector wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed. MIME came after SMTP, for example, and HTTP is used for all sorts of not-HTML-or-hyper-anything stuff. That statement smacks me of "wow, HTTP is a pretty good RPC, but too bad it's only/mainly for transporting HTML, shucks!". The name of the protocol is not very representative anymore either of how it's used or how anyone should use it. If HTTP fits the bill, then use it and move on.

And I keep saying that SMTP is a perfectly good message-queue broker message submission protocol (and POP a perfectly good message-queue broker:consumer protocol), but nobody ever listens. :P

I listened, derefr. I listened. ;)

Re: It's TCP vs. RPC All over Again

#66

Post by pcthrowaway »

pavlov wrote: post #60
danans wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> CORBA - you define interfaces in a special language and compile them. Data is not self-describing. OMG the Common Object Request Broker Architecture (which coincidentally was created by OMG). I never thought I'd see that acronym again, and all these years later, I still don't understand what it is.

But is it not obvious? It’s the architecture for brokering requests of objects most common.

No no no, it's a Common broker architecture for object requests

Re: It's TCP vs. RPC All over Again

#67

Post by seanhunter »

noselasd wrote: post #63
seanhunter wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Normal DNS will switch to TCP for any large request and has done for quite some time.

Unless you're using the musl libc - which is in heavy use in conteainerized applications

OK well if it does zone transfers those are over TCP only and always have been.

Re: It's TCP vs. RPC All over Again

#68

Post by monocasa »

Animats wrote: post #30

There have been lots of RPC protocols. Here are some still in use. Transport level: * Sun RPC [1]. QNX still uses this. It can run over UDP or over raw Ethernet. It just transfers an array of bytes and gets an array of bytes back - marshalling is a higher level problem. It handles messages bigger than one packet, and retransmission. It's simple and performance is good, but there is no security. * Stream Control Trans…

> Stream Control Transmission Protocol. Telcos still use this. It's how Signalling System 7 is sent over IP.

WebRTC is also a relatively thin wrapper over SCTP.

Re: It's TCP vs. RPC All over Again

#69

Post by fulafel »

monocasa wrote: post #68
Animats wrote: post #30

There have been lots of RPC protocols. Here are some still in use. Transport level: * Sun RPC [1]. QNX still uses this. It can run over UDP or over raw Ethernet. It just transfers an array of bytes and gets an array of bytes back - marshalling is a higher level problem. It handles messages bigger than one packet, and retransmission. It's simple and performance is good, but there is no security. * Stream Control Trans…

> Stream Control Transmission Protocol. Telcos still use this. It's how Signalling System 7 is sent over IP. WebRTC is also a relatively thin wrapper over SCTP.

Yep, WebRTC data channels use SCTP (tunneled in UDP and DTLS), audio/video stuff is just SRTP (in DTLS) I think.

Re: It's TCP vs. RPC All over Again

#70

Post by monocasa »

noselasd wrote: post #62
cryptonector wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Sure, but what is UDP bringing to the party then? Interoperability. It's been how many years since SCTP was published? How's that going?

You're likely interacting with SCTP every time you use a mobile phone, as it's in heavy use in the control plane of telecom networks. Outside that, not so much though.

Also every Zoom/Google Meet call. WebRTC is on top of SCTP.
Post reply on HN