Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site fortune.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxn!ihnp4!fortune!olson
From: olson@fortune.UUCP (Dave Olson)
Newsgroups: net.micro.att
Subject: Re: Re: 7300 Probs. - CT are you out there?
Message-ID: <5434@fortune.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 4-Aug-85 21:46:46 EDT
Article-I.D.: fortune.5434
Posted: Sun Aug  4 21:46:46 1985
Date-Received: Tue, 6-Aug-85 08:22:28 EDT
References: <1054@homxa.UUCP> <6033@duke.UUCP> <222@kitty.UUCP>
Reply-To: olson@fortune.UUCP (Dave olson)
Organization: Fortune Systems, Redwood City, CA
Lines: 15
Keywords: cu

Saying that the throughput of 'cu' is limited by it's design is
ridiculous!

I've been using cu on 9600 baud lines on 11/70's (V7), VAX 11/780
(4.1BSD) , and Fortune 32:16 (V7/4.1/++ hybrid) (of course :-) ), and
ALL of them will get throughput at 9600 baud that is VERY close to a
hardwired line.  It is true that some characters will be dropped
without flow control IF the RECEIVING system is very heavily loaded,
but this does not sound likely in the case described.

If cu can't keep up on the 7300, it is either a bug in the 7300
implementation, or there is a bottleneck in the tty i/o kernel
routines, which are circumvented by the other programs mentioned.

	Dave Olson, Fortune Systems