The 8192 MTU was used on ALL tests in my original post. So I cant see how
it is the deciding issue.
"Post, Mark K"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]
m> To
Sent by: Linux on [EMAIL PROTECTED]
390 Port cc
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]
IST.EDU> Subject
Re: Did some extensive hipersocket
testing/benchmarking.... need help
05/28/2004 01:28 interpreting results.
PM
Please respond to
Linux on 390 Port
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]
IST.EDU>
That's definitely going to be a problem. Get that changed to something
more
reasonable and see what things look like.
Mark Post
-----Original Message-----
From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of James
Melin
Sent: Friday, May 28, 2004 1:53 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Did some extensive hipersocket testing/benchmarking.... need
help interpreting results.
FYI the MTU size being used was 8192
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or
visit
http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit
http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
