Re: Zmodem NOT recommended (was Re: f,e-protocol in 1.65)

Article View: alt.bbs.waffle

Article #112

#112

From: Paul Williams
Date: Sat, 11 Apr 1992 01:03

15 lines
1052 bytes

pacolley@ember.UUCP (Paul Colley) writes:

> Even for local calls, a hung recipient under Zmodem could tie up
> the sending modem.  And any replacement for UUCP-g that you propose
> has to be acceptable to those who do long-distance transfers!

  Exsqueeze me?  I've been using Zmodem since its inception on the BBSes 
  locally and I've never  seen the  circumstance you  describe.  Several 
  (many, if not most) PC-Bored network systems use  Zmodem as  protocol- 
  of-choice  over  long-distance,  because  it  is  *very*  robust   and 
  extremely fast.

-----
thantos@wyvern.via.mind.org (Paul Williams)
The Wyvern's Nest (Lawrenceville, GA)

Technical Details

Message-ID: <sRk2iB1w164w@wyvern.via.mind.org>

Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!usc!wupost!emory!uumind!willard!wyvern!thantos

References: <2872@ember.UUCP>

Show Full Headers

Complete Article Headers

Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!usc!wupost!emory!uumind!willard!wyvern!thantos
From: thantos@wyvern.via.mind.org (Paul Williams)
Newsgroups: alt.bbs.waffle
Subject: Re: Zmodem NOT recommended (was Re: f,e-protocol in 1.65)
Message-ID: <sRk2iB1w164w@wyvern.via.mind.org>
Date: 11 Apr 92 01:03:03 GMT
References: <2872@ember.UUCP>
Organization: The Wyvern's Nest (Lawrenceville, GA)
Lines: 15

Reply to Parent Message