At 11:39 22.06.2000 -0400, Brijesh Kumar wrote:
>and I noticed that packet loss could be as much as 3 %. CDPD
>modem that I used gave me about 1100 byte throughput using TCP (well,
>half the channel went in framing overheads of the MDLP and over the
>air protocol, and TCP slow starts.). With these kind of losses TCP
>throughput tanks!
this is the kind of TCP throughput that European networks were seeing to
the US throughout large segments of the 80s and early 90s.
I've transferred large mail batches over UUCP under 20% packet loss
conditions. That's when TCP gets kind of unusable.
>Of course some current RF medium such as ReFLEX network can't
>run TCP because many devices need to compete simultaneously for a
>channel and continuous allocation of channel is not guaranteed.
maybe it can't, but not for that reason.
Remember ALOHAnet, and that you don't have guaranteed continuous allocation
of channel on an Ethernet.
>Add to
>that even if there was enough bandwidth, small screen's on some of the
>today's devices can't meaningfully display all contents of modern web
>sites.
Neither can Lynx, a popular text-mode browser.
The fact is that the Internet was developed *in* and *for* the bandwidth
and display capabilities that WAP currently is claiming to be designed for.
It just scaled well.
Harald
Harald
--
Harald Tveit Alvestrand, EDB Maxware, Norway
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
