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!mhuxr!ihnp4!ucbvax!tcp-ip
From: tcp-ip@ucbvax.ARPA
Newsgroups: fa.tcp-ip
Subject: Re: ARPANET/MILNET performance statistics
Message-ID: <7959@ucbvax.ARPA>
Date: Sat, 8-Jun-85 15:08:17 EDT
Article-I.D.: ucbvax.7959
Posted: Sat Jun  8 15:08:17 1985
Date-Received: Sun, 9-Jun-85 03:37:34 EDT
Sender: daemon@ucbvax.ARPA
Organization: University of California at Berkeley
Lines: 15

From: Andrew Malis <malis@BBNCCS.ARPA>

Vint,

You are completely correct about 1822 messages greater than 126
bytes being broken up into packets up to 126 bytes long each, and
that the IMP end-to-end protocol imposes greater overhead
(destination IMP buffer space preallocation, to be precise) for
multipacket messages.

For X.25 traffic, the IMP uses 134-byte packets, so that a
full-sized X.25 message (1024 bytes + some overhead) still fits
in 8 packets.  The same multipacket overhead applies.

Andy Malis