Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!unmvax!charon!ariel.unm.edu!dd
From: dd@ariel.unm.edu
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.lans
Subject: Re: Performance problems with a DESPR
Keywords: performance questions (long)
Message-ID: <4745@charon.unm.edu>
Date: 30 Mar 89 14:41:28 GMT
References: <1349@ndmath.UUCP>
Sender: root@charon.unm.edu
Reply-To: dd@ariel.unm.edu.UUCP ()
Organization: University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM
Lines: 44

In article <1349@ndmath.UUCP> eggers@ndmath.UUCP (Mark Eggers) writes:
>I have the following configuration set up, which seems to be 'legal'
>according to DEC's Network and Communications Buyer's Guide.

	[...]

>The problem:
>
>	As long as I telnet, rlogin, ftp, etc. between the three
>Convexes on the thinwire Ethernet, performance is what one would
>expect (no noticable delays in telnet IO, 50 - 100 K file transfer rates).
>
>	As soon as one of the Convexes attempts to go through the
>DESPR, performance becomes 'terrible' (delays of one to two seconds
>at odd times in telnet IO, ftp of 3 - 10 K).

	[...]

>Any thoughts on this problem would be greatly appreciated. Right
>now, we have removed the terminal server, DESPR, and Compaq in
>order to make room for the three Convexes. Needless to say, I would
>like all of these devices (plus 2 NeXTs) on the net.

	We have had performance problems like this when we have mixed
	E'net V.1 and no-heartbeat V.2 on a DELNI with heartbeat V.2
	and IEEE 802.3 accidentally.  Have you kept careful track of
	this parameter?  If you still can't figure it out, and if you
	have the $$$ to play with it, try substituting Cabletron eqpt
	in for the DEC eqpt.  They have a plethora of diagnostic LEDs
	they call "LANVIEW" which really help to figure out what's 
	going on.


Don Doerner (dd@ariel.unm.edu)

University of New Mexico CIRT
2701 Campus Blvd. NE.
Albuquerque, NM, 87131

(505) 277-8036
Don Doerner (dd@ariel.unm.edu)

University of New Mexico CIRT
2701 Campus Blvd. NE.