Return to BSD News archive
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!simtel!lll-winken.llnl.gov!hookup!news.mathworks.com!gatech!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.chattanooga.net!tarush!tom From: tom@tarush.chattanooga.net (Tom Rush) Subject: Re: iijppp and kernel ppp device X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2] Organization: Rush Co. Message-ID: <DBpG4E.6G@tarush.chattanooga.net> References: <3u3co4$hur@Mars.mcs.com> Date: Fri, 14 Jul 1995 12:02:37 GMT Lines: 28 Christopher Hilton (chilton@MCS.COM) wrote: : Is there a speed penalty for using the tun0 device rather than the : ppp0 interface and fi so is there any way to configure iijppp to use : the ppp0 interface? I have been using iijppp for several weeks now and have seen no speed penalty whatsoever; in fact, it seems to be slightly better than my experiences with ppp in the past. With a 14400 modem, I get transfer rates of about 1570 when ftp'ing gzipped files. This compares well with uucp, which runs about 1650 with gzipped news batches. : has the ability to do dial on demand. This is the feature that I : really need. My only problem with demand dialing was sendmail. I couldn't get it to stop dialing up the name server no matter how I tried! I would receive mail via uucp, the modem would hang up, then as soon as rmail invoked sendmail, there went the modem again. (This happened even with 'nodns' in my sendmail m4 file..) I finally changed over to smail, which, after fixing the FLOCK_MAILBOX omission in the port, was easily configured to prevent the needless nameserver lookups. I'm quite pleased with iijppp, and recommend it highly. -- Tom Rush tom@tarush.chattanooga.net