|
Thanks for the advice, everyone. I'm leaning toward implementing this, with reservations. The programmer on the other end wants to formally acknowledge each record ("ok" or "rt"), while I feel that this additional overhead is unnecessary. We already had a spec for "send next", which implies that the record was valid and accepted. RT would be sent only when we detect a bad record. I don't feel that this added complexity adds to the protocol we've established. Guess I'd better get busy..... Gotta get this thing delivered Monday. Thanks again....... Eric DeLong Sally Beauty Company MIS-Sr. Programmer/Analyst 940-898-7863 or ext. 1863 -----Original Message----- From: Scott Klement [mailto:klemscot@klements.com] Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2002 12:44 AM To: 'rpg400-l@midrange.com' Subject: Re: Sockets client in RPGIV TCP ensures that every packet sent is received in the same order that it was sent. At a lower level, IP performs a checksum on the data to make sure that the data within each packet is not garbled. So, yes... TCP/IP will make sure that same data that was sent is also received. Unfortunately, this is not really "data validation". Just because the sent data and the received data matches doesn't mean that this data is "correct". The sending program could have a bug. The receiving program could have a bug. The data could have gotten corrupt on disk on one side or another... reasons why the data could be invalid are many :) So, I would never advise against a check-digit. It's not nearly as robust a mechanism for ensuring data integrity as that used by TCP, but it may validate your record layout in a way that TCP can't even understand... Of course, it's your call... On Tue, 29 Jan 2002, DeLong, Eric wrote: > > Group, > > I got a q+d project this morning to write a socket client app. The > programmer at the other end wants to include a check digit to validate the > record before processing. I always thought TCP handled all data validation, > eliminating the need to add this layer of validation. He claims that bad > data and/or garbled records will still sometimes be returned to the > application, making this additional testing and process control necessary. > I have doubts. Can anyone confirm that this is necessary, or even useful? > TIA. > > Eric DeLong > Sally Beauty Company > MIS-Sr. Programmer/Analyst > 940-898-7863 or ext. 1863 > _______________________________________________ This is the RPG programming on the AS400 / iSeries (RPG400-L) mailing list To post a message email: RPG400-L@midrange.com To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options, visit: http://lists.midrange.com/cgi-bin/listinfo/rpg400-l or email: RPG400-L-request@midrange.com Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives at http://archive.midrange.com/rpg400-l.
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].
Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.