Return to BSD News archive
Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.carno.net.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!news.mira.net.au!vic.news.telstra.net!act.news.telstra.net!psgrain!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!news-res.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!news.mathworks.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in3.uu.net!psinntp!psinntp!psinntp!usenet2.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!usenet1.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!awfulhak.demon.co.uk!awfulhak.demon.co.uk!awfulhak.demon.co.uk!not-for-mail From: brian@awfulhak.demon.co.uk (Brian Somers) Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc Subject: Re: FTP performance with pppd Date: 5 Aug 1996 15:06:24 +0100 Organization: Coverform Ltd. Lines: 18 Message-ID: <4u4v50$hh@anorak.coverform.lan> References: <32037C10.41C67EA6@solidsys.com> <32041EE6.8F6@www.play-hookey.com> <4u1rrj$6b2@ucthpx.uct.ac.za> NNTP-Posting-Host: localhost.coverform.lan X-NNTP-Posting-Host: awfulhak.demon.co.uk X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2] S Marquard (smarq@ucthpx.uct.ac.za) wrote: : I have got throughput of about 2700bps using pppd, vs 3100bps using ijppp : (with 28.8 modems). Adjusting the mtu/mru values hasn't helped. : I'd also like to know what the difference is. If you send 1500 byte packets, they may get fragmented further down the "virtual" line. If they do, and only one packet gets through, your side will need to re-send both - worse than having a lower packet size. Conversley, you've got more overhead...... Personally, I don't know what my MTU is - it doesn't matter that much when you just exchange low volumes of news & mail, and play a mud. -- Brian <brian@awfulhak.demon.co.uk> Don't _EVER_ lose your sense of humour....