On Sat, 28 Jul 2001, Nat Pryce wrote:

> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Hugh Sasse Staff Elec Eng" <hgs / dmu.ac.uk>
> > I didn't realize it could cope with that case as well.  I'll have
> > to go back to my books on this then.  I may not need
> > to worry about breaking large objects up in that case....
> 
> Letting UDP do the segmentation will make the app easier to write, but will
> reduce
> the likelihood of an application message being delivered, because UDP is
> will discard
> delivered data when a fragment is lost. The larger your datagram, the less
> likely it
> is that each datagram will be delivered, resulting in lower throughput for
> your
> application.  It is harder work, but more efficient, to implement
> fragmentation &

OK, that is reassuring -- I've not wasted too much of my time!

> reassembly in the application and send small UDP datagrams, each containing
> approx 1500 bytes.  These are very unlikely to be fragmented during

As small as that?  I'd heard a figure of 64k.  OK, I'll look into that bit 
further.  


I'd still be interesed in the bit manipulation stuff if anyone has a good
answer -- I feel it is something I should know and have possibly forgetten.

> transmission.
> 
> Cheers,
>         Nat.
> 
	Thank you,
	Hugh
> 
> 
> 
>