Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 alpha 4/15/85; site ucbvax.ARPA
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!cbosgd!ucbvax!tcp-ip
From: tcp-ip@ucbvax.ARPA
Newsgroups: fa.tcp-ip
Subject: Re: ARPANET/MILNET performance statistics
Message-ID: <7955@ucbvax.ARPA>
Date: Sat, 8-Jun-85 04:23:11 EDT
Article-I.D.: ucbvax.7955
Posted: Sat Jun  8 04:23:11 1985
Date-Received: Sun, 9-Jun-85 02:27:01 EDT
Sender: daemon@ucbvax.ARPA
Organization: University of California at Berkeley
Lines: 17

From: CERF@USC-ISI.ARPA

Marianne,

I don't understand exactly what you are disagreeing with; I based my
comments on the tables that Dave published. Are you disagreeing with
the numbers he shows? It seemed to me that those tables reflected
the ISI gateway bearing a consdierably larger amount of traffic than
any other gateway by at least a factor of two (if memory serves)
and that it dropped a higher percentage of packets.

Please elaborate on your recent short note so it is clearer to me,
at least, how you interpret Dave's tables.

thanks,

Vint