Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!necntc!ames!sdcsvax!ucbvax!MONK.PROTEON.COM!jas
From: jas@MONK.PROTEON.COM (John A. Shriver)
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip
Subject: More on TCP performance
Message-ID: <8710051528.AA00267@monk.proteon.com>
Date: Mon, 5-Oct-87 11:28:08 EDT
Article-I.D.: monk.8710051528.AA00267
Posted: Mon Oct  5 11:28:08 1987
Date-Received: Thu, 8-Oct-87 04:41:41 EDT
References: <8710041343.AA18256@topaz.rutgers.edu>
Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Distribution: world
Organization: The ARPA Internet
Lines: 17

Are there any published studies on NETEX performance?  It would be
good if the world could learn from the frustrations of the past.

One of the interesting limits that has not been mentioned in the
discussion is the programming interface.  While I've never written a
"sink" protocol family for 4.xBSD, I did write a "sink" driver
(if_bb.c, for "Bit Bucket").  I found that even UDP can't feed the
driver all that fast on a Sun.  The same probably applies to the
socket() interface itself, which could be tested with the "sink"
protocol family.

Proteon did adress the obvious problems of packet buffers in
ProNET-80.  All of the boards have at least 3 on the receive side.
Some have 16KB of memory that holds as many packets as fit.  The
VMEbus allows you to implement DMA at speeds over 100 megabits/second,
which allows the ProNET-80 VMEbus card to move data from ring to bus
RAM at 80 mbps.