home
***
CD-ROM
|
disk
|
FTP
|
other
***
search
/
kermit.columbia.edu
/
kermit.columbia.edu.tar
/
kermit.columbia.edu
/
newsgroups
/
misc.19950929-19951130
/
000280_news@columbia.edu_Thu Nov 2 03:42:04 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 AA24430
(5.65c+CU/IDA-1.4.4/HLK for <kermit.misc@watsun.cc.columbia.edu>); Fri, 3 Nov 1995 10:05:01 -0500
Received: by apakabar.cc.columbia.edu id AA18518
(5.65c+CU/IDA-1.4.4/HLK for kermit.misc@watsun); Fri, 3 Nov 1995 10:04:59 -0500
Path: news.columbia.edu!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!spool.mu.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!cs.utexas.edu!academ!bcm.tmc.edu!news.msfc.nasa.gov!newsfeed.internetmci.com!inet-nntp-gw-1.us.oracle.com!news.caldera.com!news.cc.utah.edu!news.cs.utah.edu!cc.usu.edu!jrd
From: jrd@cc.usu.edu (Joe Doupnik)
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.kermit.misc
Subject: Re: Kermit vs. FTP speed
Message-Id: <1995Nov2.094204.65699@cc.usu.edu>
Date: 2 Nov 95 09:42:04 MDT
References: <46jq0k$gol@galileo.csun.edu> <46mcpb$i9l@apakabar.cc.columbia.edu> <478um3$jsk@galileo.csun.edu>
Organization: Utah State University
Lines: 47
Apparently-To: kermit.misc@watsun.cc.columbia.edu
In article <478um3$jsk@galileo.csun.edu>, swalton@galileo.csun.edu (Stephen Walton) writes:
> 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 f
le 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.
NE-1000's are 8-bit Ethernet boards and are hardly suitable for
today's swift traffic. Are you really on an 8088 machine? If not please
try an NE-2000 16-bit board.
NCSA doesn't make Packet Drivers. Perhaps you mean Crynwr Collection
Packet Drivers.
The indication of loss of comms when XON/XOFF flow control is turned
off is a dead giveaway for the Ethernet board (the NE-1000) being clobbered
by fast traffic.
Joe D.