home
***
CD-ROM
|
disk
|
FTP
|
other
***
search
/
kermit.columbia.edu
/
kermit.columbia.edu.tar
/
kermit.columbia.edu
/
newsgroups
/
misc.19950929-19951130
/
000268_news@columbia.edu_Wed Nov 1 23:08:51 1995.msg
< prev
next >
Wrap
Internet Message Format
|
1995-12-25
|
3KB
Received: from apakabar.cc.columbia.edu by watsun.cc.columbia.edu with SMTP id AA20346
(5.65c+CU/IDA-1.4.4/HLK for <kermit.misc@watsun.cc.columbia.edu>); Thu, 2 Nov 1995 07:24:11 -0500
Received: by apakabar.cc.columbia.edu id AA03708
(5.65c+CU/IDA-1.4.4/HLK for kermit.misc@watsun); Thu, 2 Nov 1995 07:24:10 -0500
Path: news.columbia.edu!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!news.uoregon.edu!news.sprintlink.net!hookup!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!news.mathworks.com!news.kei.com!newsstand.cit.cornell.edu!news.graphics.cornell.edu!news.tc.cornell.edu!newsserver.sdsc.edu!nic-nac.CSU.net!csun.edu!galileo.csun.edu!not-for-mail
From: swalton@galileo.csun.edu (Stephen Walton)
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.kermit.misc
Subject: Re: Kermit vs. FTP speed
Date: 1 Nov 1995 15:08:51 -0800
Organization: Cal State Northridge Dept. of Physics & Astronomy
Lines: 52
Message-Id: <478um3$jsk@galileo.csun.edu>
References: <46jq0k$gol@galileo.csun.edu> <46mcpb$i9l@apakabar.cc.columbia.edu>
Nntp-Posting-Host: galileo.csun.edu
Apparently-To: kermit.misc@watsun.cc.columbia.edu
In article <46mcpb$i9l@apakabar.cc.columbia.edu>,
Frank da Cruz <fdc@watsun.cc.columbia.edu> wrote:
>In article <46jq0k$gol@galileo.csun.edu>,
>Stephen Walton <swalton@galileo.csun.edu> wrote:
>>I'm almost embarrassed to be posting this, but here goes: I'm trying
>>to transfer binary files from a 386 PC with Optical WORM disk to an HP
>>series 700 machine.
>>...
>>transfer speeds with
>>Kermit which top out at 12 Kb/s, as compared to 35 Kb/s using FTP.
>There are several potential bottlenecks. First, of course, is the
>hardware -- the PC and the WORM disk -- which explains why FTP is so slow.
Both FTP and Kermit are quite slow on this particular machine. Since I
wrote last, I tried both on another machine (a 486/33 EISA machine) and
see transfer speeds measured in the hundreds of KB/s. In addition to
everything else, the WORM disk goes through the ASPI driver because it
has changeable platters, which adds another layer of overhead. However,
copying the file to transfer to the hard disk didn't speed things up.
That hard disk is also a SCSI disk with the ASPI driver between it and
MS/DOS, though, so if that is the culprit it would affect both drives.
>Second would be the Kermit protocol settings. What happens if you crank
>up the window size and packet length? Does it make a difference?
No.
>Third is flow control. Tell both Kermit programs to "set flow none".
>Let TCP and IP take care of it.
Oddly enough, this seems to break the transfer. Whenever I do 'set
flow none' the transfer hangs up as if packets are being lost. The
specific hard/software I'm using is an NE-1000 Ethernet board with the
latest NCSA packet driver, MS/DOS 5.00, MS-Kermit 3.14, C Kermit
5A(190), HP/UX 9.05.
>Fourth is the TELNET overhead. When you TELNET from MS-DOS Kermit 3.14
>into the HP, you are going through the HP's TELNET server, not to mention
>pty drivers and who knows what else. It might be an interesting experiment
>to eliminate the TELNET overhead.
I followed your instructions on how to do this, and got the same slow
transfers of 12 KB/s.
>I'm sure all of our readers would be interested in further reports on how
>this goes.
I hope so :-) .
--
Stephen Walton, California State University, Northridge
"Be careful what you wish for; you might get it." swalton@csun.edu