Article View: comp.protocols.misc
Article #319Re: SLIP: Why are people so reluctant to use it?
From: Vernon Schryver
Date: Sat, 20 Oct 1990 19:02
Date: Sat, 20 Oct 1990 19:02
27 lines
1447 bytes
1447 bytes
In article <966@lafayet.UUCP>, rob@lafayet.UUCP (Rob Freyder) writes: > What if you want to connect two remote systems via Telebit T2500 in PEP > mode ? Is this reasonable ? SLIP/PEP works fine for FTP, giving ~1000 Bytes/second transfer rates, but less than the 1400 Bytes/sec. you can get with a pair of PEP modems doing UUCP. Vanillia SLIP/PEP is almost useless for interactive TCP work, because the line turn around time caused by 41 byte headers (1 for SLIP, 40 for TCP/IP) in front of every data packet makes response far from crisp. Compressed-SLIP/PEP, is almost indistinquishable from dumb terminal use over PEP. I find it usable. Many people find the 0.02 to 0.14 second delays from the PEP line turn-arounds objectionable, with compressed-SLIP or remote terminals. For interactive use, SLIP or not, the v.32 mode of T2500's (and others) is probably better, even if the file transfer rate for FTP/SLIP/v.32 is <960 Bytes/sec. Vernon Schryver, vjs@sgi.com
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<72778@sgi.sgi.com>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!attcan!uunet!wuarchive!decwrl!sgi!vjs@rhyolite.wpd.sgi.comReferences:
<1990Oct16.225610.3505@oracle.com> <966@lafayet.UUCP>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!attcan!uunet!wuarchive!decwrl!sgi!vjs@rhyolite.wpd.sgi.com From: vjs@rhyolite.wpd.sgi.com (Vernon Schryver) Newsgroups: comp.protocols.misc Subject: Re: SLIP: Why are people so reluctant to use it? Message-ID: <72778@sgi.sgi.com> Date: 20 Oct 90 19:02:22 GMT References: <1990Oct16.225610.3505@oracle.com> <966@lafayet.UUCP> Sender: guest@sgi.sgi.com Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc., Mountain View, CA Lines: 27