korn@eris.berkeley.edu (Peter "Arrgh" Korn) (11/10/88)
I'm working with some folks that are looking at connecting anywhere from
two to a dozen macs together onto one network that are all (or most)
located at home. These macs would be connected to a central AppleShare
server that contained a multi-user database that would be used for
database searches throughout the day.
I'm looking for info on which is the best modem to use for remote
network access (specifically running AFP protocalls), and which brand
and model of 'netserial-like' box to use with these modems. My
current thoughts involve the Solana R-Server (and their new S-Server),
and the Shiva NetSerial. Possible modems include the Telebit Trailblazer Plus,
the Hayes 9600, the USR 9600, and someone's full-duplex 9600.
Specific questions:
how well does AFP packetize -> is the Telebit a win?
does the line turnaround times of half-duplex modems loose with AFP?
is there any performance difference between Solana & Shiva products?
If anyone has some transfer-time data for files transfered over AppleShare
using any sort of remote access, I'd love to have it.
Peter
--
Peter "Arrgh" Korn
korn@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU
{decvax,hplabs,sdcsvax,ulysses,usenix}!ucbvax!kornalexis@ccnysci.UUCP (Alexis Rosen) (11/16/88)
In article <7268@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU> korn@eris.berkeley.edu (Peter "Arrgh" Korn) writes: >I'm looking for info on which is the best modem to use for remote >network access (specifically running AFP protocalls), and which brand >and model of 'netserial-like' box to use with these modems. My >current thoughts involve the Solana R-Server (and their new S-Server), >and the Shiva NetSerial. Possible modems include the Telebit Trailblazer >Plus, the Hayes 9600, the USR 9600, and someone's full-duplex 9600. > >Specific questions: > > how well does AFP packetize -> is the Telebit a win? > does the line turnaround times of half-duplex modems loose with AFP? > is there any performance difference between Solana & Shiva products? The turnaround on all half-d modems is a big loss. The best of the lot (that I know of) is the Hayes V-series 9600 (and that's just about all it's good for). The USR is very bad. The Telebit _could_ be a big win but they would have to provide new proms to give a wider backchannel. I think this is unlikely and barring that, it comes in somewhat worse than the Hayes. They could also do better than the Hayes just by improving turnaround, and that is more likely to happen. (Though I don't know when, if ever.) Right now the best bet is a V.32 modem. There have been some remarkable price breakthroughs in recent weeks on that front. The first $995 true FD V.32 was announced just three weeks ago and will be shown at Comdex. Problem is, I don't remember who. I suggest asking in comp.dcom.modems. ... Maybe it was Unitel? I'm not sure... UDS, a first-rank V.32 manufacturer, just announced a V.32 last week. It supports MNP to Level 5 and will cost $1145. Available Q1 '89. I think it's safe to say that V.32s will be in the $1k to $1200 range by early next year. So for AppleTalk bridges, get a V.32. For other stuff I'd probably get the Telebit. As far as Solana vs. Shiva, I haven't used Solana but I'm very impressed with Shiva's stuff. They should be offering a NetModem 9600 V.32 for around $1800, maybe as low as $1500, in the near future. Ask them about that, I don't have any more info. Don't forget to look _closely_ at Liason before you make any purchasing descisions. You can probably get away without buying any serial/modem server at all (but all of the modem stuff discussed above still applies). ---- Alexis Rosen alexis@dasys1.UUCP or alexis@ccnysci.UUCP Writing from {allegra,philabs,cmcl2}!phri\ The Big Electric Cat uunet!dasys1!alexis Public UNIX {portal,well,sun}!hoptoad/
prc@ERBE.SE (Robert Claeson) (11/22/88)
In article <996@ccnysci.UUCP>, alexis@ccnysci.UUCP (Alexis Rosen) writes: > UDS, a first-rank V.32 manufacturer, just announced a V.32 last week. It > supports MNP to Level 5 and will cost $1145. Available Q1 '89. Microcom (remember the Microcom Network Protocol?) has a V.32 modem that supports MNP up to level 9. That means about 300% data compression (so they say) and an effective throughput of ~30 Kbps. I think it's called SQ/V.32. -- Robert Claeson ERBE DATA AB rclaeson@ERBE.SE
alexis@ccnysci.UUCP (Alexis Rosen) (11/28/88)
In article <338@maxim.ERBE.SE> prc@ERBE.SE (Robert Claeson) writes: >In article <996@ccnysci.UUCP>, alexis@ccnysci.UUCP (Alexis Rosen) writes: > >> UDS, a first-rank V.32 manufacturer, just announced a V.32 last week. It >> supports MNP to Level 5 and will cost $1145. Available Q1 '89. > >Microcom (remember the Microcom Network Protocol?) has a V.32 modem >that supports MNP up to level 9. That means about 300% data compression >(so they say) and an effective throughput of ~30 Kbps. I think it's >called SQ/V.32. I was not simply giving an example of a V.32 modem. The Microcam modem is MUCH more expensive. The reason I mentioned the UDS was its price. At $1145, it is the cheapest true V.32 modem I know of. (The Omnitell, at $995, isn't due until next year, and they are not [as far as I know] in the same league as UDS.) One other point- MNP L9 isn't going to do you much good for most use of remote appletalk. This is because typical AT traffic doesn't compress too well. It might work well for file transfer (finder copies) but I'm not sure. But if you're going to be doing file transfer, it makes much more sense to buy a telecomm program and a Telebit TB+. ---- Alexis Rosen alexis@dasys1.UUCP or alexis@ccnysci.UUCP Writing from {allegra,philabs,cmcl2}!phri\ The Big Electric Cat uunet!dasys1!alexis Public UNIX {portal,well,sun}!hoptoad/