home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!charon.amdahl.com!pacbell.com!decwrl!sdd.hp.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uunet.ca!xenitec!zswamp!geoff
- From: geoff@zswamp.UUCP (Geoffrey Welsh)
- Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
- Subject: Re: Can you lock DTE at 76,800 bps? Is that a valid speed?
- Message-ID: <cVcwXB6w165w@zswamp.UUCP>
- Date: Sun, 24 Jan 93 14:48:23 EST
- References: <C1BFEA.Itu@trauma.rn.com>
- Organization: Izot's Swamp
- Lines: 30
-
- larry@trauma.rn.com (Larry Snyder) writes:
-
- > You are correct. I indeed wish the USR would support a DTE of 115kbaud.
- > The v.fast upgrade will support this speed, but for some reason they didn't
- > include support for it in the current production modem.
-
- I don't really see a serious need. Even with the 16.8 kbps carrier, that
- accomodates almost 2.85:1 data compression, and it's 3.3:1 for a 14.4 kbps
- carrier. Do you really send that many screensful of blank spaces that you
- need more than that?
-
- I suppuse that the point will someday be moot when we're all using 64 kbps
- ISDN devices with ethernet connections. That should support up to 150:1
- compression. <grin>
-
- > UUCP throughput (v.32bis/v.42bis) is maybe 5% faster on the USR verses
- > the WB.
-
- The low latency will help that a lot. A UUCP-g packet has a maximum size
- of 71 bytes so a full 7 packet window has a maximum size of 497 bytes, or
- roughly 290 milliseconds on a 1700 CPS raw carrier. Any latency higher than -
- or even close to - that figure is going to mean that the transmitter must stop
- while waiting for an ACK to arrive.
-
- Geoffrey Welsh, 7 Strath Humber Court, Islington, Ontario, M9A 4C8 Canada
- geoff@zswamp.uucp, [xenitec.on.ca|m2xenix.psg.com]!zswamp!geoff (416)258-8467
- Now I've lost everything, I give to you my soul
- And the meaning of all that I believed before escapes me
- In this world of none, no thing, and no one
- - Genesis, _Afterglow_
-