Xref: utzoo news.sysadmin:2542 comp.dcom.modems:4108 comp.unix.questions:14776
Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!ginosko!ctrsol!cica!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!rutgers!att!ulysses!andante!alice!debra
From: debra@alice.UUCP (Paul De Bra)
Newsgroups: news.sysadmin,comp.dcom.modems,comp.unix.questions
Subject: Re: How to speed up uucp with Telebits(only getting 800 chars/sec )
Message-ID: <9585@alice.UUCP>
Date: 8 Jul 89 14:57:26 GMT
References: <200038@hrc.UUCP> <1160@intercon.UUCP> <1989Jul8.042330.19789@wobble.uucp>
Reply-To: debra@alice.UUCP ()
Organization: AT&T, Bell Labs
Lines: 27

In article <1989Jul8.042330.19789@wobble.uucp> dlu@wobble.UUCP (Doug Urner) writes:
>...
>Sadly that is not always the case.  The best I have been able to do between
>wobble and uunet (both Trailblazer+'s and both running the link to the modem
>at 19.2) is in the same range.  The B5.00 firmware doesn't make a difference
>either.  I am able to get much better through put with local connections
>and even down to the Bay Area, but to uunet better than 900 is a real
>surprise.  Any thoughts?

The throughput is not just limited by the modems. I have no experience with
Telebits, but I do use several hardwired links (rs232 at 9.6 or 19.2)
and get very different results depending on the computer hardware and the
load on the system. Sending data from a microvaxII to a 25Mhz 386 system
for instance is much faster than receiving data on the microvaxII from
the 386. Also, uucp to a heavily loaded Gould PN 6000 is much slower than
to the microvaxII or the 386.

Uunet handles lots of communications simultaneously. This means it must
be under constant heavy load, implying low throughput. The limit is in
uunet and its connection to the modems, not in the modem connection.

Paul.

-- 
------------------------------------------------------
|debra@research.att.com   | uunet!research!debra     |
------------------------------------------------------