home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- NET-1.TXT
- NETWORK IMPROVEMENTS
- --------------------
-
- With exception of a few areas, most network development in the country has been
- a haphazard process. A point has been reached where an integrated network
- plan that's agreeable to all users and servers needs to be put forth so as to
- lay out design goals for future network growth.
-
- Early packet publications had numerous articles describing the inefficiency
- of a simplex network. Simplex by its very nature suffers a loss of up to
- 50% in data throughput right off the top. This is because the receiver
- and transmitter shares the same frequency and one has to wait on the other
- before operating.
-
- In a string of digipeaters, further throughput delays occur when one or more
- of the simplex receivers detect packets from elsewhere and holds off its
- transmitter until the frequency is clear. An example in Arizona is the node on
- Mt Lemmon. LMN hears the CANSON, JACKS, NOG, SVA, SVASW and BISBEE nodes, all
- on 145.01. LMN additionally hears several BBSes as well as many on-channel
- users. Even with a lightly loaded network, delays are noticeable until the
- frequency at LMN is clear. Is it any wonder 145.01 comes to a near halt when
- activity picks up?
-
- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
- NODE NODE NODE NODE NODE
- A <145.01> B <145.01> C <145.01> D <145.01> E
-
- users users users users users
-
- Simplex network hears as a minimum, traffic from adjacent nodes, thus holding
- off local user packets until the channel is clear. Quite often, packets from
- two or more nodes away is heard, with resultant reduction in throughput.
-
- Figure 1-1
- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
- This situation improves somewhat when a simplex backbone trunk is installed.
- Initially throughput is improved since most of the users are left behind on
- the LAN channels. But usually the backbone nodes still hear more then one
- of their neighbors which causes throughput to suffer. After awhile, some of
- the high volume users will decide they have better service if they directly
- access the backbone. This adds more transmitters that adversely affects the
- backbone receivers, thus slowing network activity. After a time, the network
- with a simplex multi-user access backbone trunk is only slightly better off
- than the original primary simplex circuit.
-
- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
- NODE NODE NODE NODE NODE
- #A <441.6> #B <441.6> #C <441.6> #D <441.6> #E
- A B C D E
- 144.97 145.09 145.01 144.95 145.05
- users users users users users
-
- Simplex backbone trunk with solated LAN nodes for user access. Eliminates
- interference between LAN nodes and improves local traffic throughput. However
- basic "simplex problem" is now transfered to the backbone trunk.
-
- Figure 1-2
- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
- What's good about a simplex network? Simplex does have advantages. It's
- cheap, easy to install, and works reasonably well under lightly loaded
- conditions. As many have observed though, simplex falls apart with increased
- channel usage.
-
- It's possible the disadvantages of a simplex network can be turned to an
- advantage of sorts by analyzing its weaknesses and coming up with ways to at
- least partially off-set the problem areas. Furthermore, some of these
- techniques can be used to good advantage on more sophisticated network
- systems.