west%etd1.DECnet@AFWAL-AAA.ARPA ("ETD1::WEST") (11/17/87)
From: AVLAB::MAILER 16-NOV-1987 22:32 To: ETD1::WEST Subj: DDN Mail Message Return-Path: <postmaster%VAX4.BITNET@UWAVM.ACS.WASHINGTON.EDU> Received: from UWAVM.ACS.WASHINGTON.EDU by afwal-aaa.arpa ; 16 Nov 87 21:31:38 EDT P1-Message-Id: US**EDU;UWAVM.ACS.WASHINGTON.EDU:Lyga7Vl7 Date: Mon, 16 Nov 87 18:04-0800 X400-Trace: US**EDU; arrival Mon, 16 Nov 87 18:04-0800 action Relayed X400-Trace: US**EDU; arrival Mon, 16 Nov 87 19:22-0800 action Relayed From: PMDF Mail Server<Postmaster@VAX4.BITNET> To: "ETD1::WEST"<west%etd1.decnet@afwal-aaa.arpa> Subject: Undeliverable mail Message-Id: <UWAVM.ACS.WASHINGTON.EDU:Lyga7Vl7*> The message could not be delivered to: Addressee: 8250480 Reason: %MAIL-E-NOSUCHUSR, no such user 8250480 at node VAX4 ---------------------------------------- Received: from JNET-DAEMON by VAX4; Mon, 16 Nov 87 17:58 PST Received: From OREGON1(MAILER) by UWAV4 with RSCS id 2742 for 8250480@UWAV4; Mon, 16 Nov 87 08:50 PST Received: by OREGON1 (Mailer X1.25) id 2705; Mon, 16 Nov 87 08:51:15 PST Date: 13 Nov 87 08:36:00 EDT From: "ETD1::WEST" <WEST%ETD1.DECNET@AFWAL-AAA.ARPA> Subject: LAT vs. any other kind of terminal connection Sender: INFO-VAX Discussion <INFO-VAX@VTVM2> To: "(no name)" <8250480@UWAV4> Reply-to: "ETD1::WEST" <west%etd1.decnet@afwal-aaa.arpa> Comments: To: info-vax <info-vax@kl.sri.com> Comments: cc: labovitz%etd2.decnet@afwal-aaa.arpa At the Air Force Avionics Lab, we have an Ethernet backbone with (at least) 12 VAX and lots of graphics workstations attached. This backbone runs DECnet, LAT, CALMAnet, TCP/IP and more. This backbone serves AT LEAST 40 and maybe more highly utilized terminal servers (DECserver 100 and 200's.) This is 320 terminals and PC's connected by LAT, there are also several (10-15) devices connected by reverse LAT on DS200's...FOM's etc. My point...the net is busy but not strained. There is NO terminal I/O degredation...and this technique beats using DZ-11's hands down for off loading processing. A performance audit showed that 15% of the CPU was being spent handling interrupts (from DZ-11's). After getting rid of the DZ's and going to LAT, the time spent in interrupt was .LT. 2%. Over 10% of the VAX cpu time was returned to the users for the price of an upgrade which is justifiable in terms of convenience (for distributed connect capability) alone! Mike West Air Force Avionics Lab AFWAL/AADE WPAFB, OH 45433 west%etd1.decnet@afwal-aaa.arpa ------ ------