freeman@idaho.inference.COM (Mark E. Freeman) (07/18/90)
I have received this message about ten times. Has
anyone else noticed this behavior? So far, I haven't received
duplicates of other messages from xpert@expo.lcs.mit.edu.
-- Mark
freeman@inference.com
From jato!expo.lcs.mit.edu!xpert-mailer Tue Jul 17 15:24:18 1990
Organization: CERFnet; La Jolla, CA
Subject: Performance Analysis of X windows
Sender: xpert-request%expo.lcs.mit.edu@mitrlevm.mit.edu
To: xpert@expo.lcs.mit.edu
Hi
I am interested in pursuing the performance of X windows with
repect to the communication overhead and local/remote processing
split.
1. Where is the protocol definition documented ?
...
--pushpendra
CERFNet/SDSC/UCSD
----- End Included Message -----pushp@nic.cerf.net (Pushpendra Mohta) (07/18/90)
In article <9007172352.AA02257@idaho.inference> freeman@idaho.inference.COM (Mark E. Freeman) writes: >I have received this message about ten times. Has >anyone else noticed this behavior? So far, I haven't received >duplicates of other messages from xpert@expo.lcs.mit.edu. > >-- Mark > freeman@inference.com > I cross-posted my original message to comp.windows.x, comp.windows.misc and comp.theory. I wonder if all these groups are gatewayed to the xpert list. Even so , 10 times ? I also wonder if the annoyance factor has contributed to the lack of any responses other than the "me too" kind. The summary on performance will have to wait.I now know where the protocol is documented. Thanks --pushpendra