Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.
Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.
Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.
Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.
Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.
Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.
Is TCP not responsible for making sure that a stream is sent intact over the wire by doing whatever may become necessary as losses etc. occur during a transfer?
Does it not do a proper job of it?
Why do higher application-layer protocols and their applications still perform checksums?
While TCP does contain its own checksum, it is only a 16-bit checksum and it is certainly possible for a multi-bit transmission error to slip by the TCP checksum mechanism. This is quite rare, but it is still possible and I have in fact seen it happen (once or twice in a couple of decades).
A robust protocol will want to use a higher-level hash function to assure integrity of transmitted data. Having said that, not many applications that transmit a small amount of data go to this trouble. Bulk transfer applications (such as a package manager or auto-update mechanism) will usually use a cryptographic hash function to increase the assurance of data integrity.