home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Xref: sparky comp.dcom.modems:13041 comp.unix.sysv386:14124 comp.protocols.misc:664 biz.comp.telebit:894
- Path: sparky!uunet!olivea!xenitec!zswamp!geoff
- From: geoff@zswamp.UUCP (Geoffrey Welsh)
- Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems,comp.unix.sysv386,comp.protocols.misc,biz.comp.telebit
- Subject: Re: uucico w/v32bis vs zmodem w/v32bis
- Message-ID: <5N6oqB3w165w@zswamp.UUCP>
- Date: 6 Sep 92 20:34:27 GMT
- References: <Bu40L8.47w@gator.rn.com>
- Organization: Izot's Swamp
- Lines: 28
-
- larry@gator.rn.com (Larry Snyder) writes:
-
- > >Various people are working on a Z-Modem-like protocol for Taylor-UUCP.
- >
- > regular zmodem doesn't do so how with todays high speed modems with
- > DTE speeds > 38400. For example, with my TurboPEP modems, zmodem maxes
- > out at around 2100 cps while ymodem-g can exceed that.
-
- I believe that the difference in throughput is about 5%, resulting from
- ZMODEM's pressing need to escape any code that might foul one network or
- another.
-
- > What we need is a large packet zmodem (like Wazoo -- from Fidonet) with
- > 8K packets to take advantage of todays modems and 115200 baud DTE speeds
-
- ... or MobyTurbo, which I believe gains much of that 5% back by resisting the
- urge to send escape codes unless absolutely necessary. I believe that WaZOO,
- although inspired by ZMODEM, does not escape the questionable codes and that,
- not its block size, is largely responsible for the increased throughput.
-
- Perhaps, if Chuck is reading this, he could remind us of ZMODEM's subpacket
- overhead... and of how many bytes are circumvented with escape codes in
- vanilla ZMODEM.
-
- Geoffrey Welsh, 7 Strath Humber Court, Islington, Ontario, M9A 4C8 Canada
- geoff@zswamp.uucp, [xenitec.on.ca|m2xenix.psg.com]!zswamp!geoff (416)258-8467
- Coincidentally, most people who fight for "fairness" would be
- significantly better off under the system they call "fair"...
-