Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!samsung!uunet!bfmny0!tneff
From: tneff@bfmny0.BFM.COM (Tom Neff)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.uucp
Subject: Re: How efficient/fast is uucp?
Message-ID: <15790@bfmny0.BFM.COM>
Date: 24 Aug 90 09:04:14 GMT
References: <8464@pitt.UUCP> <1556.26d282ea@dcs.simpact.com> <1990Aug24.155109.3373@ism.isc.com>
Reply-To: tneff@bfmny0.BFM.COM (Tom Neff)
Lines: 26

In article <1990Aug24.155109.3373@ism.isc.com> johnan@mchale.ism.isc.com (John Antypas) writes:
>There is one issue that hasn't been addressed here.  A new UUCP
>protocol such as "z" for zmodem, would allow use of UUCP over X.25
>networks such as Telenet where straight "g" protocol shows its age.

Chuck Forsberg has put years of work into ZMODEM, adapting it for
hostile environments and making it very robust.  The savings over 'g'
may be marginal under *ideal* circumstances, but ZMODEM's charm is that
when things get bad it keeps chugging through (with decent throughput)
while the others fall by the wayside.  I think it's a natural for
inclusion in the UUCP protocol suite.

The ideal approach would be for one or more value adders like
Interactive to add ZMODEM to their UUCICO implementations.  Any vendor
who did this would have a competitive advantage to offer buyers.

On the other hand, since ZMODEM code is widely available and running in
UNIX environments today (the rz/sz suite) perhaps some source licensee
could simply integrate it into the SV/386 R4 UUCICO and publish the
patch.  Assuming AT&T doesn't want to get into the act.

Ah, they call me a dreamer...

-- 
Perestroika: could   \O\     Tom Neff
 it happen here?      \O\    uunet.bfm.com!bfmny0!tneff