🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1992Sep9.155143.24351@crd.ge.com> davidsen@crd.ge.com (bill davidsen) writes:
>In article <1992Sep2.223307.29625@terminator.cc.umich.edu>, honey@citi.umich.edu (Peter Honeyman) writes:
>| william E Davidsen writes:
>| |>   Greater packet overhead, I suspect. Are you using uucp spoofing to
>| |> eliminate sending all the overhead on the wire? S111.
>| 
>| this perpetuates a myth regarding telebit uucp spoofing.  it is
>| false.  the 'g' headers are *not* stripped, they are sent from one
>| modem to the next. 
>
>  Can you expand on that? From stats I keep I see an improvement in
>performance using spoofing, so I'm not sure exactly how this "myth"
>influences my numbers. My reading of the Telebit info leads me to
>believe that the acks are locally generated, never sent between modems,
>and that parts of the headers are compressed, fiddled, and/or stripped
>such that they reduce the bits going over the wire.
>
>  I willing to believe that Telebit might state something not true, or
>that I might misread their description, but I find it hard to believe
>that would confuse my scripts which read the data and tell me what's
>happening for transfer rates.
>
	My understanding is that 'g' spoofing gets rid of the need
for the modem to send the 'acks' to the host, with the modem's
themselves receiving and interpreting them.  This helps increase
the throughput by reducing the load on the modem<->computer
connection because no 'acks' are being transmitted except from 
modem<->modem :)

Marc
-- 
Marc G. Fournier      | R-node Public Access Unix running UnixBBS 1.03
Etobicoke, Ontario    | 416-249-5366   24hrs 7 days/week   network email
voice: 249-4230       | shell/feed accounts available   1800+ newsgroups
marc@r-node.pci.on.ca | Telebit T3000/SupraModem2400/Cardinal 2400  FREE