HP3000-L Archives

May 2001, Week 3

HP3000-L@RAVEN.UTC.EDU

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Ted Ashton <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Ted Ashton <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Thu, 17 May 2001 10:20:54 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (54 lines)
Thus it was written in the epistle of Bengt Johansson,
> Hello members of the HP3000-L listserver !

Hello and welcome.

> Im am not a member of this list yet. ( Please tell me how to become a
> member ! )

> * To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
> * etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *

The delays you are experiencing are probably related to multiple things:
  1) The very complicated screen probably sends each of the labels and pieces
     of data (and perhaps display characteristics such as lowlight) as separate
     packets.  Item three below explains why this is more significant in VT-MGR
     than Telnet.
  2) The VT-MGR and Telnet delays are probably related to
     a) Network latency (sheer distance for a packet to travel) and
     b) Possibly network misconfiguration in some places--if a DNS server has
        gone down, for example, and the network protocol is trying to use it
        and timing out.
     c) Problems with packets getting dropped or mangled on some parts of the
        network, requiring (perhaps multiple) retransmissions.
     The differences in these things at various places around Sweden would
     explain why some users are getting good results and others are getting
     poor results.  Differences in configuration on their own machines may
     also factor into it.
  3) NS/VT (VT-MGR) does only send one packet when you press return--typically,
     but that one packet carries significantly more overhead than a telnet
     packet.  It is possible to read characters from the terminal one at a
     time, however.  The vi editor, for example, does this, and I believe that
     Quick does as well.  In that situation, Telnet is better because each
     single-character packet carries much less overhead that a single-character
     NS/VT packet.  You may want to consider the "Advanced Telnet" option which
     QCTerm provides.  Wirt Atmar ([log in to unmask]) can advise you on the
     status of that emulator and on the steps necessary to take advantage of
     Advanced Telnet on your 3000.  The Advanced Telnet offers the large-packet
     advantage of NS/VT without the associated overhead in the case of
     single-character reads.

HTH,
Ted
--
Ted Ashton ([log in to unmask]), Info Sys, Southern Adventist University
          ==========================================================
If others would but reflect on mathematical truths as deeply and as
continuously as I have, they would make my discoveries.
                                           -- Gauss, Karl Friedrich (1777-1855)
          ==========================================================
         Deep thoughts to be found at http://www.southern.edu/~ashted

* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *

ATOM RSS1 RSS2