Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!mcdchg!ddsw1!karl From: karl@ddsw1.MCS.COM (Karl Denninger) Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems Subject: Re: HST and uucp Summary: U R Hosed Keywords: uucp / hst Message-ID: <1989Oct16.152823.27786@ddsw1.MCS.COM> Date: 16 Oct 89 15:28:23 GMT References: <[2535d5d4:17]comp.dcom.modems@nstar.UUCP> Reply-To: karl@ddsw1.MCS.COM (Karl Denninger) Organization: Macro Computer Solutions, Inc., Mundelein, IL Lines: 37 In article <[2535d5d4:17]comp.dcom.modems@nstar.UUCP> akcs.larry@nstar.UUCP (Larry Snyder) writes: >Is anyone use the HST for UUCP transfers? > >My PEP gets 1450 cps sending mail via UUCP using the built in UUCP. > >My HST gets 230 cps sending mail via UUCP to another HST - and both >modems are locked yet produce 1550 cps when connected via ProYam >doing a Zmodem - Zmodem transfer. > >Help - I have 3 sites picking up mail from my HST - and I need to get >the speeds up there. I have considered using ProYam using scripts - but >would rather use UUCP. > >Ideas? Suggestions? You're out of luck. We played for the HSTs for quite a while, and discovered the same thing you did. The problem is that your backchannel requirement exceeds the bandwidth in the modem. Thus, the line turns around, and the HST has a horrible turn-around time. The result is a VERY slow transfer, you may as well run 2400 baud! We never did find a way around it, and USR wasn't able to offer any good suggestions. As a result we don't use or recommend HSTs if the use is going to be UUCP or Unix. In fact, we removed the one we had on our dial-in/out system for exactly that reason (and gave it to a DOS person). -- Karl Denninger (karl@ddsw1.MCS.COM, !ddsw1!karl) Public Access Data Line: [+1 312 566-8911], Voice: [+1 312 566-8910] Macro Computer Solutions, Inc. "Quality Solutions at a Fair Price"