terrible slip performance

terrible slip performance

Post by Neal Beck » Wed, 15 Dec 1993 03:18:32



I am using slip between an hp9000/720 hpux9.01 system and a linux box
running pl99.13.  I got slip to start, but the performance is
terrible.  Pings take >1sec.  Eventually it just hangs.

Has anyone ever gotten good results using slip to an hp box (hp calls
this ppl)?

 
 
 

terrible slip performance

Post by Rick Jon » Wed, 15 Dec 1993 07:56:27


: I am using slip between an hp9000/720 hpux9.01 system and a linux box
: running pl99.13.  I got slip to start, but the performance is
: terrible.  Pings take >1sec.  Eventually it just hangs.

What type of line are you using? 1200, 9600? 19.2? Is there other
traffic on the line at the time? Are pings lost? Are you sending
larger than default pings?

The response time seems bad, what is the throughput like? (For
measuring throughput, and/or response time, people might want to look
at netperf, available via anonymous FTP from
col.hp.com:dist/networking/benchmarks grab version 1.7, the 1.8 that
is out there doesn't have the updated docs...oops)

I can remember playing with ping on MPE with X.25, and with a suitably
slow link, I could back-up the line with pings and watch the response
time grow...

rick jones

 
 
 

terrible slip performance

Post by Neal Beck » Wed, 15 Dec 1993 22:52:55


    Rick> What type of line are you using? 1200, 9600? 19.2? Is there
    Rick> other traffic on the line at the time? Are pings lost? Are
    Rick> you sending larger than default pings?

Thanks for the reply.  The hp is set at 38.4 with rts/cts using a
worldblazer.  I tried the linux box (also using a worldblazer) set to
19.2 and to 9600.  Pings are not lost.  I did not try an objective
measure like netperf yet, but the link is useless.  Telnet to the hp
server is so slow it's useless.

 
 
 

terrible slip performance

Post by Mark Sienkiewi » Thu, 16 Dec 1993 07:05:09




>Thanks for the reply.  The hp is set at 38.4 with rts/cts using a
>worldblazer.  I tried the linux box (also using a worldblazer) set to
>19.2 and to 9600.  Pings are not lost.  I did not try an objective
>measure like netperf yet, but the link is useless.  Telnet to the hp
>server is so slow it's useless.

Telebit has a README about how their modems behave in the face of SLIP
traffic-- you can get it from ftp.uu.net (in vendor/telebit or something
like that).

To vaguely summarize:  If you run PEP mode, you get poor performance over
SLIP links.  It is something like the packets SLIP is sending are causing
the modem to wait for timeouts to bundle them up in PEP packets to
send over the phone line.  I seem to recall that *not* using VJ header
compression actually makes things faster.

I recommend that anybody using a worldblazer get this document.  Till then,
you might just try disabling PEP mode and see if it gets any better.

Good luck,

Mark.

 
 
 

terrible slip performance

Post by Derek Piet » Thu, 16 Dec 1993 22:38:01


Quote:>Telebit has a README about how their modems behave in the face of SLIP
>traffic-- you can get it from ftp.uu.net (in vendor/telebit or something
>ike that).

        Can anyone steer me to the exact path to this information?
Thanks...

---

--------------------------
Derek J. Pietro
Picker International

 
 
 

1. terrible Apache performance

I just set up my box with Apache, to learn first hand about httpd,
and the first thing I notice is that, even after I've tried to
tweak it, it is abysmally slow in normal mode. In debug mode (-X
flag), however, it flies. Does anybody have any clue as to where
I should look for an explanation of that behaviour?

Right now, it is unusable, so your comments will be appreciated.

Olivier Lefevre

2. Tulip.c

3. terrible video performance ?

4. Adaptec AHA1515

5. Terrible 100Mbit Ethernet performance with 3Com Fast Etherlink XL

6. signal - where did it happen?

7. Terrible network performance !!!

8. Strange kernel compile errors

9. Terrible AIT3 performance.

10. NFS V3 terrible performance when system is client & server

11. IP Masquerading and terrible performance ...

12. Query: Terrible Samba performance Linux->Win98

13. Terrible TCP transmit performance