akcs.larry@nstar.UUCP (Larry Snyder) (10/13/89)
Is anyone use the HST for UUCP transfers? My PEP gets 1450 cps sending mail via UUCP using the built in UUCP. My HST gets 230 cps sending mail via UUCP to another HST - and both modems are locked yet produce 1550 cps when connected via ProYam doing a Zmodem - Zmodem transfer. Help - I have 3 sites picking up mail from my HST - and I need to get the speeds up there. I have considered using ProYam using scripts - but would rather use UUCP. Ideas? Suggestions?
davidsen@crdos1.crd.ge.COM (Wm E Davidsen Jr) (10/14/89)
I assume that you have the windows set to seven on your uucp on both ends? -- bill davidsen (davidsen@crdos1.crd.GE.COM -or- uunet!crdgw1!crdos1!davidsen) "The world is filled with fools. They blindly follow their so-called 'reason' in the face of the church and common sense. Any fool can see that the world is flat!" - anon
jimb@faatcrl.UUCP (Jim Burwell) (10/14/89)
akcs.larry@nstar.UUCP (Larry Snyder) writes: >Is anyone use the HST for UUCP transfers? >My PEP gets 1450 cps sending mail via UUCP using the built in UUCP. > >My HST gets 230 cps sending mail via UUCP to another HST - and both >modems are locked yet produce 1550 cps when connected via ProYam >doing a Zmodem - Zmodem transfer. > >Ideas? Suggestions? It's not your modem, nor your connection. It's the protocol. UUCP's 'g' protocol is a block/handshake type protocol like XMODEM. Everytime the modem sends a block (I think they're 32 bytes) it needs a handshake from the other end telling it to send the next block.. On full duplex modems, that's fine... But on modems like the Telebit TBs, and USR HSTs, which are half duplex, it will NUKE your CPS.. This is because they "turn the line around" when they need to send data back in the other direction.. This can take a bit of time. Telebit got around this problem by building uucp 'g' "spoofing" into thier modems. You set the protocol to uucp, and the modem detects when a 'g' transfer starts. The modem negotiates the 'g' protocol with the computer, and sends the data it's collected to the other Telebit with it's native PEP protocol. The recieving modem does likewise. That's why Telebit's get great 'g' protocol throughput.. As far as I know, USR hasn't built any kind of protocol spoofing into its HSTs. Therefore you take a big performance hit when you use a handshakeing protocol like 'g', xmodem, ymodem, or Kermit.. Zmodem transfers get great CPS times since it is a streaming protocol, which doesn't do any handshakeing unless there is an error, or you've hit EOF.. There's not much you can do but get a Telebit, or maybe try some of uucico's other protocols.. Since the HST is capable of an MNP error free connection, you may be able to use a protocol which doesn't do any error checking, or hand shakeing during the transfer.. Look into 't' and 'f'... -- +------------------------------------------------+--------------------------+ | James S. Burwell | | | | "UseNet...A text network | | UUCP: | in a binary world" - Me | | ...!{ames!netsys|rutgers}!faatcrl | | | !jimb | "How do you say | | . | 'multitasking' in | | Internet: . | MS-DOSish? Network | | // jimb@faatcrl.UUCP . ** | File Server!" - Me | | // . **** | | | \\ // GEnie: Airwarior: . .** | <reserved for future> | | \X/ JIMBURWELL Techrat . | <expansion.... > | +------------------------------------------------+--------------------------+
karl@ddsw1.MCS.COM (Karl Denninger) (10/16/89)
In article <[2535d5d4:17]comp.dcom.modems@nstar.UUCP> akcs.larry@nstar.UUCP (Larry Snyder) writes: >Is anyone use the HST for UUCP transfers? > >My PEP gets 1450 cps sending mail via UUCP using the built in UUCP. > >My HST gets 230 cps sending mail via UUCP to another HST - and both >modems are locked yet produce 1550 cps when connected via ProYam >doing a Zmodem - Zmodem transfer. > >Help - I have 3 sites picking up mail from my HST - and I need to get >the speeds up there. I have considered using ProYam using scripts - but >would rather use UUCP. > >Ideas? Suggestions? You're out of luck. We played for the HSTs for quite a while, and discovered the same thing you did. The problem is that your backchannel requirement exceeds the bandwidth in the modem. Thus, the line turns around, and the HST has a horrible turn-around time. The result is a VERY slow transfer, you may as well run 2400 baud! We never did find a way around it, and USR wasn't able to offer any good suggestions. As a result we don't use or recommend HSTs if the use is going to be UUCP or Unix. In fact, we removed the one we had on our dial-in/out system for exactly that reason (and gave it to a DOS person). -- Karl Denninger (karl@ddsw1.MCS.COM, <well-connected>!ddsw1!karl) Public Access Data Line: [+1 312 566-8911], Voice: [+1 312 566-8910] Macro Computer Solutions, Inc. "Quality Solutions at a Fair Price"
karl@ddsw1.MCS.COM (Karl Denninger) (10/16/89)
In article <1074@crdos1.crd.ge.COM> davidsen@crdos1.UUCP (bill davidsen) writes: >I assume that you have the windows set to seven on your uucp on both ends? That doesn't help. The HST receives the ACK and turns the line around immediately! That is the cause of the slow throughput. -- Karl Denninger (karl@ddsw1.MCS.COM, <well-connected>!ddsw1!karl) Public Access Data Line: [+1 312 566-8911], Voice: [+1 312 566-8910] Macro Computer Solutions, Inc. "Quality Solutions at a Fair Price"
aris@tabbs.UUCP (Aris Stathakis) (10/17/89)
From article <[2535d5d4:17]comp.dcom.modems@nstar.UUCP>, by akcs.larry@nstar.UUCP (Larry Snyder): ! Is anyone use the HST for UUCP transfers? ! ! My HST gets 230 cps sending mail via UUCP to another HST - and both ! modems are locked yet produce 1550 cps when connected via ProYam ! doing a Zmodem - Zmodem transfer. ! ! Ideas? Suggestions? USR have an HST/IX version of the HST which is made for UNIX and UUCP. I'm not sure what the difference is, but maybe you should give USR a call and find out. aris -- Aris Stathakis | Bang: ..!uunet!ddsw1!olsa99!tabbs!aris or aris@tabbs.UUCP - UNIX is like sex - if you've tried it, you can't get along without it. - - If you haven't you really have no idea what the fuss is all about! -
karl@ddsw1.MCS.COM (Karl Denninger) (10/17/89)
In article <287@tabbs.UUCP> aris@tabbs.UUCP (Aris Stathakis) writes: >From article <[2535d5d4:17]comp.dcom.modems@nstar.UUCP>, by akcs.larry@nstar.UUCP (Larry Snyder): >! Is anyone use the HST for UUCP transfers? >! >! My HST gets 230 cps sending mail via UUCP to another HST - and both >! modems are locked yet produce 1550 cps when connected via ProYam >! doing a Zmodem - Zmodem transfer. >! >! Ideas? Suggestions? > >USR have an HST/IX version of the HST which is made for UNIX and UUCP. >I'm not sure what the difference is, but maybe you should give USR a >call and find out. HST/IX is a SOFTWARE product. It requires another copy on the OTHER END in order to get reasonable throughput. It also appears to break intelligent mail, and requires that your users learn and use an entirely different syntax and set of programs to queue and pass files. YUCK. -- Karl Denninger (karl@ddsw1.MCS.COM, <well-connected>!ddsw1!karl) Public Access Data Line: [+1 312 566-8911], Voice: [+1 312 566-8910] Macro Computer Solutions, Inc. "Quality Solutions at a Fair Price"
paine@fungus.dec.com (Willy Paine) (10/18/89)
Hi Karl and Larry, I am not getting the whole stories on HST uucp from other site but I am awared that many uucp with HST is running UFGATE (Usenet program for MS-DOS) and this is old uucp prototcal that will not work on over 2400 bauds (both HST and PEP). Ufgate author is working on this out of gnu uucp program to support HoneyBanDer type protocol. I am running uucp to Fidonet board using with UFGATE many times a day and this board has HST modem. Willy Paine sysop/sysadm Seaeast Exchange BBS (Unix BBS) uunet!nwnexus!seaeast!willyp FidoNet 1:343/15
dg@lakart.UUCP (David Goodenough) (10/18/89)
From article <1989Oct16.153020.28068@ddsw1.MCS.COM>, by karl@ddsw1.MCS.COM (Karl Denninger): > In article <1074@crdos1.crd.ge.COM> davidsen@crdos1.UUCP (bill davidsen) writes: >>I assume that you have the windows set to seven on your uucp on both ends? > > That doesn't help. > > The HST receives the ACK and turns the line around immediately! That is the > cause of the slow throughput. Hummm - if you were _REALLY_ daring, there is a hack that could work. Or it would help the receiving end. Set the receiver to say it's window size is seven, and then if transmission is proceeding normally, only ack each 5th. or 6th. packet. Dirty, ugly, but in the presence of a true, God fearing, UUCP implementation it would work. Of course, error recovery and end of file processing would take some doing, but real UUCP users don't get errors :-) -- dg@lakart.UUCP - David Goodenough +---+ IHS | +-+-+ ....... !harvard!xait!lakart!dg +-+-+ | AKA: dg%lakart.uucp@xait.xerox.com +---+
rhg@cpsolv.UUCP (Richard H. Gumpertz) (10/21/89)
Although it is a waste, I have found with other file transfers than UUCP that it is often better to run HSTs at 2400 in full duplex with MNP enabled than to run them at 9600 and only half duplex. Give it a try, remembering that MNP may get in the way of UUCP. -- ========================================================================== | Richard H. Gumpertz rhg@cpsolv.UUCP -or- ...uunet!amgraf!cpsolv!rhg | | Computer Problem Solving, 8905 Mohawk Lane, Leawood, Kansas 66206-1749 | ==========================================================================