Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!mcsun!hp4nl!star.cs.vu.nl!rvdp From: rvdp@cs.vu.nl (Ronald vd Pol) Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems Subject: Re: should i expect MNP4 to be faster than non-MNP? Summary: (testing) one line Message-ID: <5110@loper.cs.vu.nl> Date: 15 Jan 90 22:13:53 GMT References: Distribution: comp Organization: V.U. Informatica, Amsterdam, the Netherlands Lines: 26 In article , chet@arc.UUCP (Chet Wood) writes: > The new modem he sent has the same problem-- here are the effective > baud rate numbers I get when connected to the everex running the > latest version of Mac Kermit, 900 byte packets, a 10KB compressed file > in binary mode: > > non-MNP 1653 > reliable 1550 > As far as I know MNP 4 offers an efficiency of at most 120%, MNP 5 offers an efficiency of at most 200%. Both offer a 100% reliable connection. (So with MNP modems you don't need Kermit, just cat the file). If you already have a compressed file, the compression techniques of MNP won't help much (on the contrary, as you have shown!). Try sending a file with all the same characters in it, you should get a throughput of approximately 1.2*2400=2880 bps. (Of course your computer should be connected to the modem at a speed of 4800 bps or more). BTW I am still looking for a description of the MNP 5 protocol. If anyone knows where I can get it, please followup, reply, shout, give smoke signals, ... -- -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Ronald van der Pol These are the days of miracle and wonder, this is a long distance call....