Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!rpi!clarkson!grape.ecs.clarkson.edu!nelson From: nelson@sun.soe.clarkson.edu (Russ Nelson) Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip.ibmpc Subject: Re: ka9q performance? Message-ID: Date: 2 Feb 91 17:20:45 GMT References: <9102012059.aa22267@louie.udel.edu> Sender: @grape.ecs.clarkson.edu Reply-To: nelson@clutx.clarkson.edu (aka NELSON@CLUTX.BITNET) Organization: Clarkson University, Potsdam NY Lines: 19 In-Reply-To: cmaeda@EXXON-VALDEZ.FT.CS.CMU.EDU's message of 2 Feb 91 01:56:22 GMT In article <9102012059.aa22267@louie.udel.edu> cmaeda@EXXON-VALDEZ.FT.CS.CMU.EDU (Christopher Maeda) writes: I have a thin ethernet with two hosts, a NeXT (25mhz 68030, 4.3 BSD) and a pc (4.77mhz 8088, ka9q Version="113090", 3c501 with packet driver v 7.2 from Clarkson). When I try to ftp files between the two, I get throughput on the order of 12kpbs for small files and large files end up timing out. Is this the kind of performance that I should expect given the crappy hardware on the pc or is something wrong somewhere? The 3c501 cannot handle back-to-back packets. I'm sure that your NeXT will send back-to-back packets if your pc is advertising the appropriate TCP window. The solution? Make the tcp window the same size as the tcp mss. -- --russ Humble Quaker, and damned proud of it. It's better to get mugged than to live a life of fear -- Freeman Dyson I joined the League for Programming Freedom, and I hope you'll join too.