Xref: utzoo comp.unix.sysv386:6 comp.dcom.sys.cisco:435
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!lll-winken!uunet!sunquest!alpha.sunquest.com!gavron
From: gavron@alpha.sunquest.com (Ehud Gavron)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.sysv386,comp.dcom.sys.cisco
Subject: Re: ISC 2.2 SL/IP throughput?
Message-ID: <7017@sunquest.UUCP>
Date: 30 Aug 90 05:48:43 GMT
References: <3694@wb3ffv.ampr.org> <26@astph.UUCP> <1990Aug23.160013.1199@scuzzy.mbx.sub.org> <1990Aug29.233628.2595@craycos.com>
Sender: news@sunquest.UUCP
Reply-To: gavron@alpha.sunquest.com
Followup-To: comp.unix.i386
Organization: Sunquest VMS Internals, Tucson AZ
Lines: 68
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.3-4

In article <1990Aug29.233628.2595@craycos.com>, ewv@craycos.com (Eric Varsanyi) writes...
#In article <1990Aug23.160013.1199@scuzzy.mbx.sub.org> src@scuzzy.mbx.sub.org (Heiko Blume) writes:
#>can someone tell me what throughput i can expect with sl/ip over
#>a modem connection with HST modems (14400bps)?
# 
#This does not directly relate to HST's, but it might be interesting anyway.
# 
#Configuration:
#--------------
#	SCO Unix (3.2.2) with the vanilla driver on a vanilla serial board
#	Connection between 2 Telebit T2500's.
#	Cisco terminal server providing slip bridge onto ethernet 


Our configuration: Two Telebit T2500s over an analog leased line
	between two serial ports on MicroVAXen.

#	19200 hardware flow control on both sides

Same here

# 
#Numbers:
#--------
#		Kb/s (reported by ftp)	Roundtrip (reported by ping)
#V.32 mode	.795			370
#(s50=6)
# 
#Pep		.799			1420
# 
#Pep/compressed	.823			1551	
#(s110=1)


My comparison is *extremely* similar.

# 
#Interactive was virtually useless at 1.4 seconds/echo, but using V.32
#even editing with vi is tolerable. Compressed mode isn't worth the trouble
#unless you are sending BIG files.

	PEP is worth it if you intend to do any FTP, or if you intend
	to use more than one average tcp link at a time.  In other words,
	if a majority of the time this limited line will support two
	connections, we have found that PEP-19200 is much more responsive
	than V.32-9600 on the same line.

	Note that for single-channel interactive use, I concur that
	V.32 is better for latency.
# 
#Does anyone know when/if Telebit is going to put IP header prediction into
#the modems (so they don't have to turn around for the ACK's)?
	
	I'd like to find out myself :-)

#-- 
#-Eric Varsanyi (ewv@craycos.com)        Cray Computer Corporation

	Ehud

/----------------------------------------------------------------------------\
| Ehud Gavron, Systems analyst  | gavron@vesta.sunquest.com      (Internet)  |
| Sunquest Information Systems  | uunet!sunquest!gavron          (UUCP)      |
| 930 N. Finance Center Drive   | gavron@lampf                   (BITNET)    |
| Tucson, Arizona, 85710        | (602)722-7546/885-7700 x.2546  (AT&Tnet)   |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|           your cute quote here                                             |
\----------------------------------------------------------------------------/