Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!wuarchive!cs.utexas.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!att!laidbak!obdient!simon!royko!ditka!kls
From: kls@ditka.UUCP (Karl Swartz)
Newsgroups: news.config
Subject: Re: Warp speed Mr. Scott!
Message-ID: <4122@ditka.UUCP>
Date: 10 Sep 89 06:53:18 GMT
References: <1989Aug21.124002.11054@robohack.uucp> <1059@aurora.AthabascaU.CA> <7561@cloud9.Stratus.COM> <6064@ficc.uu.net> <47647@oliveb.olivetti.com>
Reply-To: kls@ditka.UUCP (Karl Swartz)
Organization: Inaction Central, Los Alamos, New Mexico
Lines: 26

In article <47647@oliveb.olivetti.com> jerry@olivey.UUCP (Jerry Aguirre) writes:
>In article <6064@ficc.uu.net> sms@ficc.uu.net (Stanley M. Sutton) writes:
>>Why not just use minutes?  Integers are easier to track than floating.

>Some think a connection should be DEDICATED
>if it can connect in less than one minute while others think that should
>be reserved for values less than one second.

Another part of the problem that I haven't seem mentioned
is what happens if a line is busy.  Let's say I talk to
a local site that I call as soon as I have anything for
it to do.  By the books that's a DIRECT link.  But what
if their modem is busy?  All of a sudden it's an HOURLY
link.  Some people adjust for this by using DIRECT+LOW or
some similar adjustment for sites that are chronically
difficult to reach, but that's still rough.

The idea of having a link cost being the typical delay in
seconds seems like a good, if still imperfect, solution,
IMHO.  Implementing it is another matter entirely.

-- 
Karl Swartz	|UUCP		{ames,lll-winken}!pacbell!ditka!kls
1-505/672-3113	|Internet	kls@rt1.lanl.gov
		|BIX		kswartz
"I never let my schooling get in the way of my education."  (Twain)