home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: in2.uu.net!xenitec!zswamp!zswamp!geoff
- From: geoff@zswamp.UUCP (Geoffrey Welsh)
- Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
- Subject: Re: Is UUCP is critical feature for Unix machine?
- Date: Sat, 20 Jan 1996 18:08:27 EST
- Message-ID: <960120.180827.4y9.rnr.w165w@zswamp.UUCP>
- References: <4cce5p$605@cmcl2.NYU.EDU> <DKuGFn.7zt@bokonon.ussinc.com>
- Organization: Izot's Swamp
- X-Newsreader: rnr v1.28
-
- stephen@bokonon.ussinc.com (Stephen M. Dunn) writes:
- > UUCP spoofing on Telebits, using variations on the PEP
- > protocol, is a very good thing, as PEP (at least the original
- > one) is half-duplex. I'm not sure about TurboPEP.
-
- Still half-duplex, just much faster (well over 2000 CPS for unidirectional
- transfers, I hear).
-
- > For full-duplex modulations with reasonable symmetry,
- > such as V.34, V.32bis, V.32, etc., you will probably get
- > some benefit from spoofing if you are also using error
- > correction. I know that even at g(64,7), I don't get the
- > full theoretical bandwidth out of a non-spoofed V.32bis
- > connection - though I suspect there may be delays on one
- > or both computers in many cases which also decrease throughput.
-
- Latency is everything with those small windows. Crank to 7 packets and
- disable error correction for best performance on full duplex high speed
- modems.
-
- > If you're not passing much UUCP traffic, though, then
- > UUCP spoofing won't really give you much of a benefit. And
- > if you're not using UUCP-g, chances are your modem won't
- > spoof whatever UUCP protocol you _are_ using.
-
- Most protocols other than g don't really need spoofing. Well, there's G, but
- that's just g without the hidden glitches.
-
- --
- Geoffrey Welsh, Senior Developer, InSystems Technologies Inc.
- geoff@zswamp.uucp, [xenitec.on.ca|m2xenix.psg.com]!zswamp!geoff
- USENET has become the sanctuary of the Church of the Perpetually Injured Party.
-