From owner-freebsd-hackers Tue Nov 14 21:41:44 1995 Return-Path: owner-hackers Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) id VAA16383 for hackers-outgoing; Tue, 14 Nov 1995 21:41:44 -0800 Received: from asstdc.scgt.oz.au (root@asstdc.scgt.oz.au [202.14.234.65]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) with ESMTP id VAA16362 for ; Tue, 14 Nov 1995 21:41:31 -0800 Received: (from imb@localhost) by asstdc.scgt.oz.au (8.6.12/BSD-4.4) id QAA19325; Wed, 15 Nov 1995 16:40:32 +1100 From: michael butler Message-Id: <199511150540.QAA19325@asstdc.scgt.oz.au> Subject: Re: Sup! It's killing us! Please help! To: msmith@atrad.adelaide.edu.au (Michael Smith) Date: Wed, 15 Nov 1995 16:40:31 +1100 (EST) Cc: jkh@time.cdrom.com, hackers@freefall.freebsd.org In-Reply-To: <199511150410.EAA03435@genesis.atrad.adelaide.edu.au> from "Michael Smith" at Nov 15, 95 04:10:28 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24beta] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Length: 2172 Sender: owner-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk Michael Smith writes: > Hmm. If it's possible to restrict sup-serving times and clients then > I'm happy to set up a small server here. Connectivity isn't the problem, > just the potential volume issues that may upset our provider. (Although > they're a Netscape mirror, so this is hardly going to touch the surface 8) Volume isn't (currently) a problem here .. I am my own provider with an average inbound bandwidth utilisation of <20% and outbound of <%5 (avg. over a month) :-) I wrote to Peter Wemm .. > >> That's really it! Especially desirable would be any sites in Europe, > >> Japan or Australia, where sup services are especially thin. > >hmmm peter, I meant to set jhome up for this but never got it going.. > >what's your bandwidth like? > Within Perth, 28.8K. I can probably organise 128K but not on jhome. > Unfortunately it'd be practically useless outside of Perth. :-( The WA > to "rest of australia" 2Megabit link (run by Telstra Internet Service, > was AARNet) is running at about 60% packet loss, bringing the > effecitive throughput down in the order of equvalent to a miserable > 9600 baud.. :-( (ie: over 1KB/sec is a bonus). > Sigh. I know how you feel .. I've seen many comments from Perth residents about this. I run an ISDN feed into the same building as the new Sydney->LA link if that's of more help. Packet loss from here to freefall is not unacceptable .. even at this hour of the day .. asstdc:~ % /sbin/ping -c 20 freefall.freebsd.org PING freefall.freebsd.org (192.216.222.4): 56 data bytes 64 bytes from 192.216.222.4: icmp_seq=0 ttl=241 time=294.253 ms 64 bytes from 192.216.222.4: icmp_seq=1 ttl=241 time=270.990 ms : 64 bytes from 192.216.222.4: icmp_seq=17 ttl=241 time=270.527 ms 64 bytes from 192.216.222.4: icmp_seq=18 ttl=241 time=272.189 ms 64 bytes from 192.216.222.4: icmp_seq=19 ttl=241 time=275.917 ms --- freefall.freebsd.org ping statistics --- 20 packets transmitted, 18 packets received, 10% packet loss round-trip min/avg/max = 265.901/293.016/433.456 ms Obviously, if we could convince David Dawes (on physics.su.oz.au) it'd be better .. they've got 2meg into the same Telstra office. michael