home
***
CD-ROM
|
disk
|
FTP
|
other
***
search
/
Columbia Kermit
/
kermit.zip
/
newsgroups
/
misc.19980901-19981211
/
000074_news@newsmaster….columbia.edu _Mon Sep 28 23:33:36 1998.msg
< prev
next >
Wrap
Internet Message Format
|
2020-01-01
|
2KB
Return-Path: <news@newsmaster.cc.columbia.edu>
Received: from newsmaster.cc.columbia.edu (newsmaster.cc.columbia.edu [128.59.35.30])
by watsun.cc.columbia.edu (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id XAA05542
for <kermit.misc@watsun.cc.columbia.edu>; Mon, 28 Sep 1998 23:33:35 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from news@localhost)
by newsmaster.cc.columbia.edu (8.8.5/8.8.5) id XAA23111
for kermit.misc@watsun; Mon, 28 Sep 1998 23:33:35 -0400 (EDT)
Path: news.columbia.edu!newsfeed.nyu.edu!nntprelay.mathworks.com!bigboote.WPI.EDU!xgarden.WPI.EDU!not-for-mail
From: nijajen@WPI.EDU (Gordon Yu Au)
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.kermit.misc
Subject: kermit transfer speeds
Date: 29 Sep 1998 02:48:59 GMT
Organization: Worcester Polytechnic Institute
Lines: 18
Message-ID: <6uphqr$79k$1@bigboote.WPI.EDU>
NNTP-Posting-Host: xgarden.wpi.edu
X-Newsreader: TIN [UNIX 1.3 950824BETA PL0]
Xref: news.columbia.edu comp.protocols.kermit.misc:9257
We have wired two computers together using a null modem cable on the
com2 ports of both. Using MS Kermit, we have transferred files from
one to the other using server-client and peer-to-peer transfers. In
the server-client transfer, we encountered an 84% efficiency at
9600bps whereas we encountered a 72% efficiency at 115,200bps.
Does anyone know of any reasons for this drop in efficiency?
Does anyone know of any types of bottlenecks there are in this type of
setup that would affect transmission speed and efficiency?
Thanx in advance.
please email any suggestions to (nijajen@wpi.edu)
Gordy [8^/>
WPI-MIS '00
nijajen@wpi.edu
*hug**slap**wink*