On Tue, Feb 27, 2001 at 06:20:28AM -0800, Guillermo Emilio wrote:
> If we were running telnets, ummm, ftps, and many other
> kind of protocols or application, the speed became
> down, very down, so, we get speeds over 6k p/s. and we
> were paying for a bandwide of 128k, so i hope that at
> least we get speeds higher than 15 or 20k per second.
Well, you cannot do anything about the bd latency. This is due to the fact
your signal has to travel to the orbit and back.
SAT Uplinks are only good for batch file transfer. For this you should also
have an Operating system which allows Large TCP Windows and possible some
additional Features like Selective Ack. It is quite a large topic to
optimize TCP over FAT Pipes with high lattency. Linux has some of those
Features. So you might actually be able to transfer with 12kcps for large
very large [BFiles. HTTP with Keepalive might also help to reduce the
Problem of Keep alives. One thing to increase the Web Experience is to use
active caches, so the cache will often used pages at nite.
Greetings
Bernd
--
(OO) -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] --
( .. ) ecki@{inka.de,linux.de,debian.org} http://home.pages.de/~eckes/
o--o *plush* 2048/93600EFD eckes@irc +497257930613 BE5-RIPE
(O____O) When cryptography is outlawed, bayl bhgynjf jvyy unir cevinpl!
-
[To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
"unsubscribe firewalls" in the body of the message.]
