Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!thunder.mcrcim.mcgill.edu!snorkelwacker.mit.edu!spool.mu.edu!uunet!zephyr.ens.tek.com!tektronix!percy!percival.rain.com!nerd From: nerd@percival.rain.com (Michael Galassi) Newsgroups: comp.sys.next Subject: Re: 9600 baud modems Message-ID: <1991Jun19.145456.11577@percy.rain.com> Date: 19 Jun 91 14:54:56 GMT References: <13483@pt.cs.cmu.edu> <1991Jun18.213132.20862@percy.rain.com> Sender: news@percy.rain.com (news maintainer) Organization: Percy's UNIX, Portland, OR. Lines: 28 Nntp-Posting-Host: percival.rain.com >I stated... > For slip the PEP stuff is useless. bob@MorningStar.Com (Bob Sutterfield) comes back with: >If you have implemented RFC1144 VJ TCP header compression, PEP modems >are quite useful for SLIP and PPP. PEP will hold the line when >nothing else will, FTP throughput is reasonable, and interactive >response is survivable. I counter with: This is only true if you have only *one* thing going on over the link. I don't know about anyone else but we use slip here for a metro-net (RAINet) and at any given time we have things going on in all directions (nntp news, smtp mail, rlogins, ftps and more). While we have not tried trailblazers on our slip links our trafic realy does NEED full duplex capability. I beleive anyone who is running slip will have multiple IP connections going at once, otherwise they are going to be better off dialing out with kermit. Interactive throughput is MUCH better, there is no packet overhead when typing. In any case I do agree (I think I even said this) that the PEP modems will work like no other when the delays are long. I do have one and I'll swear by it for UUCP work, still the best. -m -- Michael Galassi | nerd@percival.rain.com MS-DOS: The ultimate PC virus. | ...!tektronix!percy!nerd