Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watnot!watmath!clyde!rutgers!andromeda!argus!njitsc1!bc
From: bc@njitsc1.UUCP
Newsgroups: comp.os.minix,comp.mail.uucp
Subject: Re: uucp source copyright status - IMPORTANT
Message-ID: <122@njitsc1.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 31-Mar-87 09:35:26 EST
Article-I.D.: njitsc1.122
Posted: Tue Mar 31 09:35:26 1987
Date-Received: Thu, 2-Apr-87 07:38:26 EST
References: <480@gouldsd.UUCP> <43183@beno.seismo.CSS.GOV>
Reply-To: bc@njitsc1.UUCP (Bill Cheswick)
Distribution: comp.os.minix
Organization: New Jersey Institute of Technology, Newark NJ
Lines: 22
Keywords: uucp uucico kermit
Xref: utgpu comp.os.minix:467 comp.mail.uucp:386

In article <7319@boring.mcvax.cwi.nl> jack@boring.UUCP (Jack Jansen) writes:
>
>The point is, why should we use those icky uucp protocols that are
>hardly documented, and unused except in some proprietary sofware

Because it is faster.  Compare the transfer speeds of uucp and kermit: you only
get about half your baud rate in kermit file transfers.  uucp does better.

Of course, the real problem is that kermit is still inefficient.  (They said
they were thinking of improving the protocol a couple of years ago.  I wonder
if anyone has worked on it...)

And while you are looking for a protocol, how about using one that transmits
files in both directions at the same time?  There are many protocols that
have solved this problem already.

Actually, I use kermit quite often, and like it.  But shouldn't a program
that may be responsible for a lot of telephone use be as efficient as possible?

Bill Cheswick                      uucp:   bellcore!argus!njitsc1!bc
New Jersey Inst. of Tech.          ARPA:   argus!njitsc1!bc@flash.bellcore.com
                                   bitnet: bc%argus.uucp at mouton.arpa"