Xref: utzoo comp.dcom.modems:7143 comp.unix.sysv386:1774 comp.protocols.tcp-ip.ibmpc:4102
Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!timbuk!cs.umn.edu!uc!noc.MR.NET!msi.umn.edu!umeecs!umich!samsung!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!cica!iuvax!news!cartan!ndmath!nstar!larry
From: larry@nstar.uucp (Larry Snyder)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems,comp.unix.sysv386,comp.protocols.tcp-ip.ibmpc
Subject: Re: slip
Message-ID: <1990Nov02.120230.4598@nstar.uucp>
Date: 2 Nov 90 12:02:30 GMT
References: <1990Oct31.115338.4582@nstar.uucp>  <1990Nov01.025031.12861@virtech.uucp> <90305.113314DRJ100@psuvm.psu.edu>
Organization: Northern Star Communications, Limited
Lines: 25

DRJ100@psuvm.psu.edu (Daniel R. Jeuch) writes:

>Admittedly, Even with a V.32 MNP5 capable modem, you shouldn't use MNP5
>because it tends to slow things down.  But with a 9600V.32 MNP4 setting,
>througput for me is on average .8-.9kb/sec... Not bad.  TN3270 is slow,
>but it it nice to be able to FTP anywhere over a phone line!  :)
>Of course, this also depends on how your host decides to feed you with
>data... If you have last priority on the local net, you might not get
>.9kb/sec.

Well, with the T2000 - I get right round 1kb/sec and with the 2400 
baud modem - I get right around 1.5 kb/sec which is "fair" I guess.

I received a message that stated if our (I am running ISC 2.2) SLIP
uses compressed headers we would get better throughput -  also
I should wave RFC1144, RFC1171 and RFC1172 at the ISC developers.

Comments from ISC?


-- 
       Larry Snyder, Northern Star Communications, Notre Dame, IN USA 
 {larry@nstar, uunet!sco!romed!nstar!larry, nstar%larry@iuvax.cs.indiana.edu}
                     backbone usenet newsfeeds available
         Public Access Unix Site (219) 289-0282 (5 high speed lines)