tcp vs. udp queries performance difference

[Simon Waters]

>>I think it's better to use a persistent tcp connection to a nameserver=20
>>rather than getting screwed by udp packet losses.
In both cases the repeat of a lost packet requires another round trip -
so whilst you might recognise packet loss quicker with TCP you don't
save anything but time for that specific lookup.

I can't imagine a name server I need to communicate with frequently
enough to justify TCP overhead except perhaps my local resolvers, and if
I have significant packet loss to them it can be fixed locally.

Remember also where packet loss is 'prioritised' - DNS may be higher
priority than other packet types (icmp, smtp are generally considered
less time critical).


-- Attached file included as plaintext by Ecartis --
-- File: signature.asc
-- Desc: OpenPGP digital signature

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFAb+xDGFXfHI9FVgYRAtRaAKCR81c4mCFIujfRt+Zfhv/0UmFlLwCg09Zs
Lyo0BGwYTuYTY8R7OyIiOhM=
=o3oI
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----