AFAIK, that numbering is done by the OS itself and is not intended to be accessed/used by applications.
On 09/09/2012 10:54 PM, d3fault wrote: > Haha, funny. Reliable doesn't mean reliable. Who knew... > > Are you sure it isn't just Qt failing to utilize the TCP protocol > correctly? I don't mean to question your expertise, as you sound like > you know what you're talking about, but this quote from wikipedia > makes it sound like TCP does in fact do mid-stream reliability: "TCP > primarily uses a cumulative acknowledgment scheme, where the receiver > sends an acknowledgment signifying that the receiver has received all > data preceding the acknowledged sequence number" [0]. That plus > automatic re-transmission of lost packets sounds like exactly what I > want! How do I get that number in a platform independent manner [and > make sense of it]? > > > I was going to code my own ack layer on top of TCP... but after a few > designs and reading further into TCP it sounded an awful lot like > reinventing the wheel. I came up with my own sequence number scheme > and everything and oh boy TCP really sucks if you're right :-P... > > > > An actually-reliable-tcp-socket class (called something else, and > perhaps based on QAbstractSocket instead?) sounds like it would make a > great addition to Qt don't you think? Maybe something along the lines > of QNetworkRequest::Acknowledged() [signal].... though not necessarily > anything to do with QNAM (especially since the QNetworkReply makes a > better acknowledgement in that case lol (and now I'm just confusing > myself)). > > > [0] - > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transmission_Control_Protocol#Reliable_transmission
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Interest mailing list Interest@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest
