Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!know!news.cs.indiana.edu!maytag!xenitec!zswamp!root
From: root@zswamp.fidonet.org (Geoffrey Welsh)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Re: V.32bis and V.17 approved by CCITT
Message-ID: <7103.27F02712@zswamp.fidonet.org>
Date: 26 Mar 91 20:04:26 GMT
Organization: Izot's Swamp BBS - Kitchener, Ontario
Lines: 31

Dave McLane (davidg%aegis.or.jp@kyoto-u.ac.jp ) wrote:
 >root@zswamp.fidonet.org (Geoffrey Welsh) writes:

> Larry Snyder (larry@nstar.rn.com ) wrote:
>
>  >Now - UUCP on these modems is another story - in the HST
>  >modem at best throughput is 350 cps, while V.32 on non
>  >v.42bis and non v.32bis connections runs around 880 cps.
>
>  ... which I consider decent throughput for what is essentially a 9600 bps
> modem, don't you?

 >OK, so you're kidding ... aren't you?

   Should I be?

   880 CPS is decent throughput for a non-streaming protocol over a long-haul 
9600 bps path with buffering and packetizing delays.  Try Kermit, XMODEM-1K 
(or YMODEM), SEAlink, and others and let me know how they perform.  Try them 
over the HST, over V.32, over a null modem.  If and when you're finished, I'd 
like to compare your result table with my experiences.
 

--  
UUCP:     watmath!xenitec!zswamp!root | 602-66 Mooregate Crescent
Internet: root@zswamp.fidonet.org     | Kitchener, Ontario
FidoNet:  SYSOP, 1:221/171            | N2M 5E6 CANADA
Data:     (519) 742-8939              | (519) 741-9553
The mile is traversed not by a single leap, but by a procession of coherent 
steps; those who insist on making the trip in a single element will be failing 
long after you and I have discovered new worlds.        - me