Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!clyde.concordia.ca!uunet!wuarchive!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!decwrl!ucbvax!ucdavis!csusac!scott
From: scott@csusac.csus.edu (L. Scott Emmons)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc
Subject: Re: XMODEM,YMODEM,ZMODEM,KERMIT Which is best and why?
Keywords: ZMODEM, KERMIT
Message-ID: <1990Jan2.175320.10597@csusac.csus.edu>
Date: 2 Jan 90 17:53:20 GMT
References: <1990Jan2.070518.1822@csusac.csus.edu> <1578@clmqt.marquette.Mi.US>
Reply-To: scott@csusac.UUCP (L. Scott Emmons)
Organization: California State University, Sacramento
Lines: 26

In article <1578@clmqt.marquette.Mi.US> scott@clmqt.marquette.Mi.US (Scott Reynolds) writes:
>>I have noticed that ZMODEM fails miserably when attempting transfers through
>>[...]
>This one seems pretty strange to me.  ZModem runs pretty well through
>buffered lines, being an ACK-less protocol.  I've done it myself a few
>[...]

I 'spose I didn't make it very clear in my post, but yeah, the problem with
Zmodem that I have found likely _isn't_ the protocol itself (which, IMHO, is
the best one yet), but rather is with the setup of our computer network
network. [sic -- we have a network of networks, if you will].  I still find it
strange that ACKfull protocols work where Zmodem doesn't -- Apparantly some
boxes (X.25 networks, for example) barf on ACKs...which is why Kermit was
(according to my sourcs) invented (it uses no ACKs).  It seems to me that
Zmodem should work anywhere that any other protocols do...but I'm not familiar
with the mechanics of Zmodem.

Has anyone else had problems like I illustrated in my previous post?  If so,
perhaps we can isolate it and create a fix for certain environments.  I will
post my findings...time to go fire up the datascope!

-- 
			L. Scott Emmons
			---------------
		...[!ucbvax]!ucdavis!csusac!scott
		ucdavis!csusac!scott@ucbvax.berkeley.edu