Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!mephisto!ncsuvx!mcnc!rti!xyzzy!meissner From: meissner@dg-rtp.dg.com (Michael Meissner) Newsgroups: comp.org.usenix Subject: Re: USENIX Board Studies UUCP Message-ID: Date: 12 Dec 89 15:44:09 GMT References: <36700@apple.Apple.COM> <127@dumbcat.UUCP> <36766@apple.Apple.COM> <1989Nov26.001644.3176@utzoo.uucp> <93061@pyramid.pyramid.com> Sender: usenet@xyzzy.UUCP Organization: Data General (Languages @ Research Triangle Park, NC.) Lines: 19 In-reply-to: zeeff@b-tech.ann-arbor.mi.us's message of 4 Dec 89 22:02:32 GMT In article zeeff@b-tech.ann-arbor.mi.us (Jon Zeeff) writes: | >Clearly, the Telebit 'g' spoof works well for us now. Philosophically, | >though, it bothers me that we have an OS as vendor-independent as UNIX, | >yet we are so dependent on Telebit. Ideally, other equipment should be | | All we really need is for vendors to fix the larger packet sizes | code in uucp so that acks will fit in small reverse channels. Telebit | has made alot of money providing a workaround for this "bug" in uucp. Another thing to look into is dealing with small mail messages as well as the large news batches. As I understand the way uucp works, it has to syncronize both ends when each file is completely transfered. This leads to poor performance if you don't have a large file to amortize the startup and shutdown costs before the next file is transfered. -- -- Michael Meissner, Data General. Until 12/15: meissner@dg-rtp.DG.COM After 12/15: meissner@osf.org