Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!csd4.milw.wisc.edu!bionet!sdsu!usc!hacgate!lori
From: lori@hacgate.scg.hac.com (Lori Barfield)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.apollo
Subject: Re:  domain protocol over twisted pair
Message-ID: <4537@hacgate.scg.hac.com>
Date: 2 Aug 89 22:01:50 GMT
References: <8908012221.AA05657@richter.mit.edu>
Reply-To: lori@hacgate.UUCP (Lori Barfield)
Organization: Hughes Aircraft Co., El Segundo, CA
Lines: 33

Well, here in my group this discussion went around awhile ago.
We have an internet of two rings, and the communication between the
two was at times 100 times slower than normal inter-ring talk.
One engineer ran tests on our DN3000 on SR9.7; he claims that the
Suns on the *same* Ethernet are much, much faster than the Apollo is.

When I sent him a copy of David's post, this is what he replied:

>In article <8908012221.AA05657@richter.mit.edu> krowitz@RICHTER.MIT.EDU (David Krowitz) writes:
> >[...]telecom office states that the maximum throughput of an ethernet
> >     segment is 3 MB/sec on a 10 Mhz thick ethernet cable. This is due
> >     to packet collisions eating up network bandwith. Thus, the maximum
> >[...]

>On our network we typically run at less than %10 of ethernet capacity
>according to our network monitoring tools. Collissions are VERY rare
>events, I estimate I see a collision once every 10 minutes. You can
>see this by bringing up the performence meter and selecting the
>collisions or by looking at one of the ethernet transceivers with
>the LED lights on it.
>
>Also I used to run 10-12 diskless suns on an ethernet, doing all
>their swapping and paging over ethernet and never used more than
>%20 of ethernet capacity. I suspect the Apollo interface to
>ethernet is just plain Lame.


So the problem apparently isn't collision.  Any comments?
Is SR10 any better for Native?



...lori