Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!wuarchive!usc!apple!fair
From: fair@Apple.COM (Erik E. Fair)
Newsgroups: comp.org.usenix
Subject: Re: USENIX Board Studies UUCP
Message-ID: <36766@apple.Apple.COM>
Date: 25 Nov 89 01:04:51 GMT
References: <36700@apple.Apple.COM> <127@dumbcat.UUCP>
Organization: USENET Protocol Police, Western Gateway Division
Lines: 29

In the referenced article, marc@dumbcat.UUCP (Marco S Hyman) writes:
>    
>I almost agree with Erik. Adding a standard full-duplex protocol to take
>advantage of the other direction is the missing piece.  This is based upon
>the assumption that the world will eventually migrate to full duplex links.
>V.32 modems are a reality. ISDN may not be that far away.

Marc, I'm pretty sure that UUCP over trailblazers with 'g' spoofing
will *always* do better than UUCP over CCITT V.32. I've never seen UUCP
get better than 760 cps over a 9600 baud direct serial link. I
regularly see throughput in the 1000 to 1200 cps range (i.e. faster
than 9600 baud can give you) using trailblazers with my normal UUCP
neighbors. Stats available upon request.

The only reason to buy V.32 modems is for interactive access, and
protocols that really want it (e.g. IP). For unidirectional file
transfer protocols (e.g. UUCP g, xmodem, kermit), a trailblazer with
spoofing should always win bigger, because it's got more bandwidth to
allocate in the right direction, and it "understands" what's going on
(and helps the packets along).

CCITT V.32 is not as big win for UUCP as a Telebit Trailblazer.

ISDN is another question entirely, and the answer depends entirely upon
how the PTT's want to charge for it.

	Erik E. Fair	apple!fair	fair@apple.com

CYA:	I am nothing more than a satisfied customer of Telebit Corporation.