Xref: utzoo comp.dcom.modems:7139 comp.unix.sysv386:1762 comp.protocols.tcp-ip.ibmpc:4100
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!virtech!cpcahil
From: cpcahil@virtech.uucp (Conor P. Cahill)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems,comp.unix.sysv386,comp.protocols.tcp-ip.ibmpc
Subject: Re: slip
Message-ID: <1990Nov02.032318.18632@virtech.uucp>
Date: 2 Nov 90 03:23:18 GMT
References: <1990Oct31.115338.4582@nstar.uucp> <1990Nov01.025031.12861@virtech.uucp> <1990Nov01.145738.16101@nstar.uucp>
Reply-To: cpcahil@virtech.UUCP (Conor P. Cahill)
Organization: Virtual Technologies Inc., Sterling VA
Lines: 25

In article <1990Nov01.145738.16101@nstar.uucp> larry@nstar.uucp (Larry Snyder) writes:
>But I thought that SLIP assumed the hardware (modem link) supplied the
>error correction - not TCP/IP itself - am I wrong?

If I remember correctly,  SLIP itself does not have error correction.  However,
the layers above it (TCP in most cases) will usually have thier own 
error correction.  The main exception to this is the UDP protocol (which is
used by NFS).

Even without the error correction problem the IP datagrams still have an 
packet/ack protocol.

>So for SLIP you are saying I don't want MNP enabled?  How about v.42bis?

I would think that either of the protocols (due to thier own packetization)
would result in lower throughput.

Wait for an implementation of PPP to get good throughput over serial 
lines.


-- 
Conor P. Cahill            (703)430-9247        Virtual Technologies, Inc.,
uunet!virtech!cpcahil                           46030 Manekin Plaza, Suite 160
                                                Sterling, VA 22170