home
***
CD-ROM
|
disk
|
FTP
|
other
***
search
/
Columbia Kermit
/
kermit.zip
/
newsgroups
/
misc.20000824-20010305
/
000111_news@columbia.edu _Wed Nov 1 09:40:14 2000.msg
< prev
next >
Wrap
Internet Message Format
|
2020-01-01
|
3KB
Return-Path: <news@columbia.edu>
Received: from watsun.cc.columbia.edu (watsun.cc.columbia.edu [128.59.39.2])
by fozimane.cc.columbia.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA06725
for <kermit.misc@cpunix.cc.columbia.edu>; Wed, 1 Nov 2000 09:40:14 -0500 (EST)
Received: from newsmaster.cc.columbia.edu (newsmaster.cc.columbia.edu [128.59.59.30])
by watsun.cc.columbia.edu (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id JAA01812
for <kermit.misc@watsun.cc.columbia.edu>; Wed, 1 Nov 2000 09:40:13 -0500 (EST)
Received: (from news@localhost)
by newsmaster.cc.columbia.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id JAA20945
for kermit.misc@watsun.cc.columbia.edu; Wed, 1 Nov 2000 09:30:06 -0500 (EST)
X-Authentication-Warning: newsmaster.cc.columbia.edu: news set sender to <news> using -f
From: fdc@columbia.edu (Frank da Cruz)
Subject: Re: Cumulative Packet Error Limit in Kermit??
Date: 1 Nov 2000 14:30:05 GMT
Organization: Columbia University
Message-ID: <8tp9dd$kef$1@newsmaster.cc.columbia.edu>
To: kermit.misc@columbia.edu
In article <9ZPL5.97972$ib7.13838586@news1.rdc1.nj.home.com>,
dls2 <dlshearer@home.com> wrote:
: "Grant Cartledge" <Grant.Cartledge@nec.com.au> wrote:
: > We are using the Kermit protocol coded within the commercial package
: > "Procomm Plus". Our application is a satellite communications system
: > which uses mobile terminals in vehicles. Our current testing is
: > concentrating on data transmission in adverse propagation conditions
: > whereby the end-to-end link is interrupted by line-of-sight obstructions
: > (in this case, trees). The periods of shading obvioulsy cause lost and
: > errored packets. The file transfer is failing by exceeding a cumulative
: > error limit. This surprised us as prior testing (albeit in slightly less
: > shaded conditions) did not show this phenomenon. Is this error limit
: > inherent in the Kermit protocol or is it an artificial limit imposed by
: > the authors of Procomm Plus??
:
: The choice to abort, after a set number of errors, is an implementation
: issue, rather than a problem with the protocol, itself. Under conditions
: of error, the Kermit protocol indicates that it just keeps resending, until
: such time as proper acknowledgement is made, or, until a decision to
: abort has been acted upon. The decision to abort is made by either a
: person or a program, and, in this case, the decision to abort is made
: by the program, Procomm Plus.
:
The obvious suggestion is to use real Kermit software rather than a
third-party implementation. Real Kermit programs include numerous controls
over every aspect of the protocol (including retry threshold, timeout methods
and limits, and so on) that are essential to this kind of application, but
that are lacking in third-party implementations. Furthermore, when you have
questions with our software, we can help you. If you have problems with
third-party software, you must get help from the third party.
More info on the Kermit website:
http://www.columbia.edu/kermit/
- Frank