From owner-freebsd-questions Tue Jul 9 01:10:16 1996 Return-Path: owner-questions Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id BAA14325 for questions-outgoing; Tue, 9 Jul 1996 01:10:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from freebsd.gaffaneys.com ([134.129.252.29]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id BAA14300; Tue, 9 Jul 1996 01:10:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from zach@localhost) by freebsd.gaffaneys.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id DAA04696; Tue, 9 Jul 1996 03:11:01 -0500 To: "Gary Palmer" Cc: Jaye Mathisen , Network Coordinator , freebsd-questions@Freebsd.org Subject: Re: Increasing FTP thruput. References: <25014.836849490@palmer.demon.co.uk> From: Zach Heilig Date: 09 Jul 1996 03:11:00 -0500 In-Reply-To: "Gary Palmer"'s message of Mon, 08 Jul 1996 19:11:30 +0100 Message-ID: <874tnhalt7.fsf@freebsd.gaffaneys.com> Lines: 18 X-Mailer: Gnus v5.2.32/Emacs 19.31 Sender: owner-questions@Freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk "Gary Palmer" writes: > My POINT was that I have not noticed a slowdown, as if binary transfer > rates have dropped off for some reason, then (I would have thought) > text rates would have too... I just didn't have any binary rates to > hand at the time as I tend to throw text around a lot more than > binary. As far as I can tell, text transfers did not drop, only binary ones, until I disabled those couple of options, now it seems to be very slight bit faster than before, +.1K/sec on transfers, and the link is also mostly usable for interactive use (feels like about 1200 baud though) with a small impact on transfer rate. -- Zach Heilig (zach@blizzard.gaffaneys.com) Support bacteria -- it's the only culture some people have! ALL unsolicited >commercial< email is subject to a $100 proof-reading fee.