Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 4.3bsd-beta 6/6/85; site ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ucbvax!telecom From: telecom@ucbvax.UUCP Newsgroups: mod.telecom Subject: Re: FASTLINK (tm) "10,000 bps or faster" modem Message-ID: Date: Tue, 19-Nov-85 23:12:58 EST Article-I.D.: SIMTEL20.KPETERSEN.12161118915.BABYL Posted: Tue Nov 19 23:12:58 1985 Date-Received: Wed, 18-Dec-85 02:59:48 EST Sender: usenet@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU Organization: The ARPA Internet Lines: 25 Approved: telecom@mit-xx.arpa Summary: not so fast > As stated in previous follow-up, they don't intend it for use as an > interactive modem, but chiefly for bulk-transfer applications. Seems > to me some of the high-volume net sites ought to look into these beasties. uucp "g" protocol wouldn't work too well, since the packets are 64 bytes apiece. I remember a few horror stories about the uucp in 2.9 bsd: there is a one second-per-packet sleep in the 2.9 uucp code that everyone comments out. The packet timeout on Fastlink would have a similar effect. Just think of telling your boss that your $2000 modems are putting out 22 bytes per second... However, pyramid!csg has pointed out that one could use a different protocol; also, 'g' is supposed to support 4096-byte packets, though I've never heard of anyone actually using packets larger than 64 bytes. Then again, maybe this is our big chance to break away from uucp altogether... -- Romain Kang, Pyramid Technology Corporation US Mail: 900 Route 9, Woodbridge, NJ 07095 Ma Bell: (201) 750-2626 UUCPnet: {allegra,cmcl2,pyramid,topaz}!pyrnj!romain