From owner-freebsd-hackers Wed Oct 4 04:47:41 1995 Return-Path: owner-hackers Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) id EAA11003 for hackers-outgoing; Wed, 4 Oct 1995 04:47:41 -0700 Received: from po8.andrew.cmu.edu (PO8.ANDREW.CMU.EDU [128.2.10.108]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) with ESMTP id EAA10998 ; Wed, 4 Oct 1995 04:47:38 -0700 Received: (from postman@localhost) by po8.andrew.cmu.edu (8.6.12/8.6.12) id HAA01572; Wed, 4 Oct 1995 07:47:26 -0400 Received: via switchmail; Wed, 4 Oct 1995 07:47:23 -0400 (EDT) Received: from unix14.andrew.cmu.edu via qmail ID ; Wed, 4 Oct 1995 07:45:24 -0400 (EDT) Received: from unix14.andrew.cmu.edu via qmail ID ; Wed, 4 Oct 1995 07:45:23 -0400 (EDT) Received: from Messages.8.5.N.CUILIB.3.45.SNAP.NOT.LINKED.unix14.andrew.cmu.edu.sun4c.411 via MS.5.6.unix14.andrew.cmu.edu.sun4c_411; Wed, 4 Oct 1995 07:45:22 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: Date: Wed, 4 Oct 1995 07:45:22 -0400 (EDT) From: Robert N Watson To: freebsd-hackers@freefall.FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: A moment in the life of ftp.cdrom.com CC: "Hector Gonzalez Jaime." , taob@io.org, hackers@freefall.FreeBSD.org In-Reply-To: <1492.812770019@palmer.demon.co.uk> References: <1492.812770019@palmer.demon.co.uk> Sender: owner-hackers@FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk This is not really a very useful answer, but I know it used to be (and probably still is the case) that when one ftp's to ftp.funet.fi, a report on login of user status and maximum available bandwidth was given. I assumed, when I first saw this, that it meant you were limited to a certain bandwidth, and this was to garuntee a load share. Whether this is the case is an interesting question, I guess. Maybe one could email them? Excerpts from internet.computing.freebsd-hackers: 4-Oct-95 Re: A moment in the life of.. Gary Palmer@palmer.demon (802) > Michael Smith stands accused of writing in message ID > <199510032321.IAA14949@genesis.atrad.adelaide.edu.au>: > >> I think microsoft has won that race, their ftp system told me to go > >> away last week, they had 1250 ftp users on line. > >Yah, but have you tried to use it past the 600 mark? Whatever it is just > >loses its marbles as far as long-distance connections are concerned. > >(At least, that's been my experience) > The problem is what network link you have really. If you can get a > fast enough network connection (perhaps FDDI or 100bTX), you should in > theory be able to handle that number without TOO many problems. Of > course, you'll always have problems with people a couple of hops away > on a fast link swamping your network :-( > Anyone know a way to do traffic limiting? Is it even fair? > Gary ---- Robert Watson (rnw+@andrew.cmu.edu) * Double major: IDS/CS * H&SS http://www.watson.org/ robert@fledge.watson.org