home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!ogicse!news.u.washington.edu!ns1.nodak.edu!plains.NoDak.edu!wilken
- From: wilken@plains.NoDak.edu (Scott Wilken)
- Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
- Subject: Re: external vs internal on 14.4k
- Message-ID: <Bx92u6.K8s@ns1.nodak.edu>
- Date: 5 Nov 92 15:54:06 GMT
- Article-I.D.: ns1.Bx92u6.K8s
- References: <720897729snx@n5ial.chi.il.us> <1992Nov5.040133.23832@tigger.jvnc.net> <3975@randvax.rand.org>
- Sender: usenet@ns1.nodak.edu (News login)
- Organization: North Dakota Higher Education Computing Network
- Lines: 29
- Nntp-Posting-Host: plains.nodak.edu
-
- In article <3975@randvax.rand.org> edhall@rand.org (Ed Hall) writes:
- >In article <1992Nov5.040133.23832@tigger.jvnc.net> johnson@tigger.jvnc.net (Steven L. Johnson) writes:
- >
- >>So much for theory. Some implementations can cause significantly
- >>increased latency when V.42bis is turned on.
- >
- >Why don't you enlighten us as to the brand and model of modem you are
- >using? I've seen no such effect with USR Couriers, for example, so I
-
- Gotta go with Ed on this one. When this stuff about V.42bis not living up
- to people's expectations (IE when people were first saying the it could
- slow a compressed transfer), I tried sending a 1.5M .ARJed file from my
- machine (with a USR Courier V.32bis) to my friends (with a USR Courier
- Dual Standard).
-
- The transfer rates came out the same by my terminal program's estimate. I
- think either one of the following:
-
- 1) Someone told you that V.42bis didnt work as expected, and you just
- took that word as true.
-
- 2) What Ed says about latency and modem's CPU power being the culprit
- is true (no opinion on this one as im not informed on the subject).
-
- Scott
- --
- Go FAST! | Internet: wilken@plains.nodak.edu | AMA #587126
- Take Chances! | UUCP: ..!uunet!plains!wilken | DoD #0087
- VF700F Interceptor | Bitnet: WILKEN@PLAINS |
-