Very Computer

Howdy --

I have a full-time (dedicated) 28.8 dialup line to my ISP.  I have fixed, not
dynamic addresses with a full subnet at my end.  The ISP is using an Annex
terminal server which supports either SLIP or PPP.  He's not using CHAP or
PAP, so authentication isn't an issue.

Question: in this environment, where I don't need dynamic address assignment
or authentication, am I better off using PPP or SLIP on the link?  What are
the tradeoffs, if any?

Thanks,

John Ackermann

Michel

| >I have a full-time (dedicated) 28.8 dialup line to my ISP.  I have fixed, not
| >dynamic addresses with a full subnet at my end.  The ISP is using an Annex
| >terminal server which supports either SLIP or PPP.  He's not using CHAP or
| >PAP, so authentication isn't an issue.
| >
| >Question: in this environment, where I don't need dynamic address assignment
| >or authentication, am I better off using PPP or SLIP on the link?  What are
| >the tradeoffs, if any?

| PPP Definitly... It has less overhead, more reliable, more
| auto-detecting...

I like your conclusion, but I'm not sure about your reasons. There's
little to choose between PPP and SLIP, CSLIP might be a little better on
dedicated lines, but PPP now has compression, and decent modems do about
as well without system CPU overhead.

In other words, it's about a tossup on performance.

However, in terms of ease of setup, probably future direction of the
dialup world (as seen toady), and available expertise in case you have a
problem, I would say PPP wins hands down.

I'm not a slave to what's trendy, I run Slackware instead of Redhat, I
still have one machines on TMNN and CNEWS instead of INN, but this is
not an area where challenge comes in, SLIP is just more work in general,
and likely to be more hassle.

--
Stupidity, like virtue, is its own reward.

TMR does UNIX and other systems stuff, some real time, network and
system admin, security, C and other good stuff.