Hello all,

The impact of single character input and echo depend on your application
and directly correlates to the ratio of keyboard input to output
displayed.  Saying this number is irrelevant at 1% is not correct.  It
depends on what you are doing.  A person who does "heads down" data
entry or uses a line based code editor would be impacted at
significantly greater than 1% whereas a person who keys in a few numbers
and paints a detail screen displaying data would be impacted at far less
than 1%.  The impact is going to be most notable over slow wide area
links, over encrypted links and over "consumer grade" DSL & Cable links.

Having said that, the HP CSY labs did a great job of implementing a
Telnet that performs at above expectations and there are terminal
emulators QCTERM as an example which alleviate the single character echo
mode telnet issue.

Regards,
  James Hofmeister
  Email: <first>.<last>@hp.com
  Hewlett Packard - Global Solutions Engineering (WTEC)
  P.S. My Ideals are my own, not necessarily my employers.



>> You should note there are several network protocols used.   We
>> currently
>>  use NS/VT which I believe is more efficient than TELNET - especially
>>  when the terminal is in Character rather than block mode.
>
> This is more urban legend that God's Own Truth, although like most
> urban
> legends it has a grain of truth to it.

Regards,
  James Hofmeister
  Email: <first>.<last>@hp.com
  Hewlett Packard - Global Solutions Engineering (WTEC)
  P.S. My Ideals are my own, not necessarily my employers.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Wirt Atmar" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Wednesday, August 17, 2005 9:24 AM
Subject: Re: [HP3000-L] Bandwidth


> Tony writes:
>
>> You should note there are several network protocols used.   We
>> currently
>>  use NS/VT which I believe is more efficient than TELNET - especially
>>  when the terminal is in Character rather than block mode.
>
> This is more urban legend that God's Own Truth, although like most
> urban
> legends it has a grain of truth to it.
>
> In block mode there is absolutely no difference between in bandwidth
> consumption in telnet and ns/vt, other than how the packets are
> constructed.
>
> Similarly the same is true for all data transmissions originated from
> the
> host sent to the terminal. They're absolutely the same.
>
> The only place where the protocols are different is in the material
> typed at
> the keyboard by you. NS/VT waits until you hit a carriage return and
> transmits
> everything you've typed in the current line as one packet. Telnet
> transmits
> each key stroke as its own individual packet.
>
> But if you think about it for just a second, that difference makes
> virtually
> no difference in the grand scheme of things. You type just a few
> characters
> and hit CR, and the host floods your screen with output in response.
> You type a
> few more characters, and then the host floods your screen again in
> response.
>
> In virtually all practical use, there's going to be much less than a
> 1%
> difference in bandwidth consumption.
>
> Wirt Atmar
>
> * To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
> * etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *
>

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