PPP Dialup speed!!
Mathew E. Kirsch
> >I can only FTP at a maximum rate of 3Kps!! Also for netscape to
browse to a
> >page is very slow!!
Well, it's obvious why that is:
> >I am using a 28800 modem and my minicom setup is configured for a
baud rate
> >of 38400.
> >I connect to my ISP at a connection speed of 28800.
You're limiting communications between the modem and the computer to
38400, which translates into about 3Kbps with the normal modem overhead.
The modem can't use any compression, because the data could
theoretically be coming to the computer at up to 115,200.
> >My win95 installation goes better than this!!
Windows 95 and the modem manufacturer assume you're a complete moron,
and configure it for you, hiding any choices you could make as deep as
they can. Linux gives you some credit for your intelligence, and assumes
that you can configure the modem to suit your situation.
Frank Sweetser
"Aaron Saikovski" <asai...@ozemail.com.au> writes:
>
> Dear All,
> I have setup my PPP connection as per the how to and I have Minicom dialing
> to my ISP.
> Everything is ok. I get assigned an IP address and can "surf" and ping etc.
>
> My main problem is speed of my connection.
> I can only FTP at a maximum rate of 3Kps!! Also for netscape to browse to a
> page is very slow!!
Have you read the PPP howto? (can be found at http://sunsite.unc.edu/LDP)
it's got a section of tips on helping out really slow links.
--
Frank Sweetser rasmusin at wpi.edu fsweetser at blee.net | PGP key available
paramount.res.wpi.net RedHat Linux 2.0.31pre9 i486 | at public servers
Sam: Hey, what's happening, Norm?
Norm: Well, it's a dog-eat-dog world, Sammy,
and I'm wearing Milk-Bone underwear.
-- Cheers, The Peterson Principle
Aaron Saikovski
Dear All,
I have setup my PPP connection as per the how to and I have Minicom dialing
to my ISP.
Everything is ok. I get assigned an IP address and can "surf" and ping etc.
My main problem is speed of my connection.
I can only FTP at a maximum rate of 3Kps!! Also for netscape to browse to a
page is very slow!!
I am using a 28800 modem and my minicom setup is configured for a baud rate
of 38400.
I connect to my ISP at a connection speed of 28800.
As soon as I run netscape or FTP to anywhere the speed is very slow.
My win95 installation goes better than this!!
Is there a configuration file that I have missed or something??
Any help would be greatly appreciated as I want to blow Win95 away
altogether :-)
Does anybody have any ideas??
Regards,
Aaron Saikovski
Ryan Cleary
In article <01bcc176$394c61a0$8fb207cb@gnome>,
Aaron Saikovski <asai...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>I can only FTP at a maximum rate of 3Kps!! Also for netscape to browse to a
>page is very slow!!
>
>I am using a 28800 modem and my minicom setup is configured for a baud rate
>of 38400.
>I connect to my ISP at a connection speed of 28800.
3 kilobytes per second is about right for a 28,800 bits per second
connection, with a slight boost from modem compression.
You have eight bits per byte, plus start and stop bits, for an
approximate 10 bits per character, or 2,880 characters per second.
Since most modems these days support data compression, you can get
3-4k/sec from time to time.
>My win95 installation goes better than this!!
Really? How much faster? I'd be interested to see how this was done.
Spirit
Aaron Saikovski wrote:
>
> Dear All,
> I have setup my PPP connection as per the how to and I have Minicom dialing
> to my ISP.
> Everything is ok. I get assigned an IP address and can "surf" and ping etc.
>
> My main problem is speed of my connection.
> I can only FTP at a maximum rate of 3Kps!! Also for netscape to browse to a
> page is very slow!!
>
> I am using a 28800 modem and my minicom setup is configured for a baud rate
> of 38400.
> I connect to my ISP at a connection speed of 28800.
>
< snip >
I think your getting confused here. A 28800 baud connection,
has a maximum of 2.8 k ( roughly ) a second. Yes, as other people
have stated, with compression you can boost that to about 4k/sec.
Windows lies. Netscape ( esp in Windows ) lie. They measure in
kbps. Thats Kilo-BITS per second... not Kilo-BYTES... that where
the difference is. I was confused by this at first too... but
someone soon pointed it out... and Its is so obvious once you know.
If you look in netscape in win95/nt/whatever... when you ftp a file
you get about 14kbps ( bits per second )... and yet when your
downloading a web page... the bottom of the netscape window
reads about 2.5 Kbps... thats kilo-bytes... not kilo-bits as in
the ftp download window.
Stupid I know. But thats what they've done.
Hope that helps.
Steve
Calvin Harrigan
Frank Sweetser <rasm...@paramount.res.wpi.net> wrote:
>"Aaron Saikovski" <asai...@ozemail.com.au> writes:
>
>>
>> Dear All,
>> I have setup my PPP connection as per the how to and I have Minicom dialing
>> to my ISP.
>> Everything is ok. I get assigned an IP address and can "surf" and ping etc.
>>
>> My main problem is speed of my connection.
>> I can only FTP at a maximum rate of 3Kps!! Also for netscape to browse to a
>> page is very slow!!
>
What do you expect from a 28.8k modem. The 3Kbs mentioned when
downloading refers to the kilobytes per second. The modem number
refers to 28.8 kilobits per second. There are 8 bits in a byte. So
you have to divide 28800 by at least 8 but more realistically by 10
because you usually have one start bit and one stop bit per byte. So
that brings you down to 2.88 Kps already. Then you have to take into
account the overhead involved in transmitting data over the internet
using things like tcp/ip and all that . There a headers and other
pieces of information added to the data to get it from here to there.
So I think that getting a 3 kilo byte per second data stream is not
only good by extremely good. This rate is probably due to compression
being employed by the modem. Better under windows 95, I doubt it but
if you say so. It could seem faster because of the way netscape is
configured and how it handles its cache. Both implementations of
netscape aren't exactly the same. They are quite different under the
hood. Hope this helps. Later!
Dimitri Maziuk
Richard Steiner wrote:
>
...
> Adding compression on top of this can provide huge gains in perceived
> throughput through the serial port (perhaps as high as 4:1 with some
> types of datafiles). Though it won't exceed the ceiling you set when
> you lock the serial port, of course...
Which reminds me: Aaron, set speed_vhi on your serial port (see
man setserial) -- 38400 is not enough for 28800 line speed with
compression enabled.
--
Dimitri
emaziuk at curtin dot edu dot au
Please CC to me when replying to Usenet or a list
Mark Hahn
: I think your getting confused here. A 28800 baud connection,
: has a maximum of 2.8 k ( roughly ) a second. Yes, as other people
: have stated, with compression you can boost that to about 4k/sec.
ignoring how data gets from the modem to Linux, a 28.8 connection
can indeed deliver a little less than 3.6 KB/s, since most people
use one of the framed protocols, which does not waste time on the
(telco) wire encoding start/stop bits, etc. I normally see 3.2 KB/s
transferring big, already-compressed things over 28.8 connections,
and up to about 4.0 for 33.6 connections.
as I said, that's ignoring how the bytes get from the modem to the
computer. for an internal modem, this isn't an issue. for an external,
you definitely want to have the port running higher than 38.4K
if you possibly can, since start/stop bits are back. 'can' here means
'have a uart with at least the 16550's 16 byte fifo. it's normally
not a problem to run 16550's at 115K, even on low-end boxes.
compression, of course, can increase these rates nearly arbitrarily high,
though I've never seen more than 3:1 compression. I normally see about
2:1 on an interactive session, albeit with ppp and thus relatively small
packets.
regards, mark hahn.
--
operator may differ from spokesperson. ha...@neurocog.lrdc.pitt.edu
http://neurocog.lrdc.pitt.edu/~hahn/
Chatr Suchinda
>My win95 installation goes better than this!!
I have my machine set up both RedHat Linux 4.2 and Win'95 (also NT but cannot
successfully connected yet). At first Linux gave the modem IRQ 3 or 4 which are both
slow to the claw. Most of the times, it cannot successfully connected at the script.
I looked up several place in the newsgroup somewhere and finally find the way to
change the modem to IRQ 10 as same as Win'95 uses. Now, the performance of Linux ppp
is a whole lot better than Win'95. You can say in ther order that I has been spoiled
and don't want to go back to Win'95 for Web browsing again. I feel like Linux dial-up
performance is almost as twice as fast as Win'95.
Anyone has the same experience? BTW, I uses Pentium 150 MHz with 33.6 modem.
--
Chatr Suchinda, Ph.D. Candidate
e-mail:gt0...@prism.gatech.edu
-=IronMan=-
On 15 Sep 1997 01:20:19 GMT, "Aaron Saikovski"
<asai...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>Dear All,
>I have setup my PPP connection as per the how to and I have Minicom dialing
>to my ISP.
>Everything is ok. I get assigned an IP address and can "surf" and ping etc.
>
>My main problem is speed of my connection.
>I can only FTP at a maximum rate of 3Kps!! Also for netscape to browse to a
>page is very slow!!
>
>I am using a 28800 modem and my minicom setup is configured for a baud rate
>of 38400.
>I connect to my ISP at a connection speed of 28800.
>
>As soon as I run netscape or FTP to anywhere the speed is very slow.
>My win95 installation goes better than this!!
>Is there a configuration file that I have missed or something??
>Any help would be greatly appreciated as I want to blow Win95 away
>altogether :-)
>
>Does anybody have any ideas??
>
>Regards,
>Aaron Saikovski
Don't use MiniCom read the ISP-Hookup-HOWTO It works great!!
Peace!!
SkateBass
-----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----
Version: 2.6.3ia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=7y3i
-----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----
Paul Jakma
Calvin Harrigan wrote:
>
> Frank Sweetser <rasm...@paramount.res.wpi.net> wrote:
>
> >"Aaron Saikovski" <asai...@ozemail.com.au> writes:
> >
> >>
> >> I have setup my PPP connection as per the how to and I have Minicom dialing
> >> to my ISP.
> >> Everything is ok. I get assigned an IP address and can "surf" and ping etc.
> >>
> >> My main problem is speed of my connection.
> >> I can only FTP at a maximum rate of 3Kps!! Also for netscape to browse to a
> >> page is very slow!!
> >
> downloading refers to the kilobytes per second. The modem number
> refers to 28.8 kilobits per second. There are 8 bits in a byte. So
> you have to divide 28800 by at least 8 but more realistically by 10
> because you usually have one start bit and one stop bit per byte. So
> that brings you down to 2.88 Kps already. Then you have to take into
> account the overhead involved in transmitting data over the internet
> using things like tcp/ip and all that . There a headers and other
> pieces of information added to the data to get it from here to there.
> So I think that getting a 3 kilo byte per second data stream is not
> only good by extremely good. This rate is probably due to compression
> being employed by the modem. Better under windows 95, I doubt it but
> if you say so. It could seem faster because of the way netscape is
> configured and how it handles its cache. Both implementations of
> netscape aren't exactly the same. They are quite different under the
> hood. Hope this helps. Later!
A slow transfer rate could also be caused by the the "other end". I've
noticed that when I ftp stuff of a certain site, netscape nearly always
reports about 1.5k. If I download something else, from the same site at
the same time, the second download will also be around 1.5k/s. Which is
3k sustained. If I ftp another file, that'll be around 1k/s. So a total
throughput of 4k, not too bad.
I once saw 6.2k/s downloading a large text file from my ISP. This was
sustained for about 40 sec. And this figure was confirmed by diald.
--
Paul Jakma
snip .no.spam from email address to reply.
******************************************************
/etc/crontab:
01 5 * * * root find dos windows -exec rm -rf {} \;
******************************************************
Nathan Stewart
On a related topic - does anyone know how to get the _CONNECT_ speed?
I've read the man page for pppd, and I was logging $3 (it's in bash)
in my ip-up script. However this only seems to echo back the speed
parameter given to pppd - not the throughput I actually get.
I'm trying to log connect rates and ping times on an address by address
basis, but I'm not getting useful information out of the line speed
parameter to ip-up. Does anyone know how to get the actual connect
speed?
Nathan Stewart
npst...@pobox.com
Kent Robotti
Add W2 to your modem init string.
AT&FW2
Darryl Dunkin
Iro...@technologist.com (-=IronMan=-) wrote:
>
>Don't use MiniCom read the ISP-Hookup-HOWTO It works great!!
>
>
>Peace!!
>
>SkateBass
>
>
"asyncmap 0" in your pppoptions file helps...
Also get IRQTune!! It works wonders :).
--
Change "nospam" to "lyrrad" to reply via e-mail.
Headwind
Check your com port -- an old 8250 UART chip needs to be upgraded to
16550A or 16550C UART chip to take advantage of the speeds.
I might be wrong...
Headwind
~~~~~~~
Breakfast.com halted, cereal pot not responding...
-----
On Wed, 17 Sep 1997 02:52:48 GMT, Iro...@technologist.com
(-=IronMan=-) wrote:
>On 15 Sep 1997 01:20:19 GMT, "Aaron Saikovski"
><asai...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
<snipped>
>
>>My main problem is speed of my connection.
>>I can only FTP at a maximum rate of 3Kps!! Also for netscape to browse to a
>>page is very slow!!
<snipped to save bandwidth>
Davy De Waele
>
>I have my machine set up both RedHat Linux 4.2 and Win'95 (also NT but cannot
>successfully connected yet). At first Linux gave the modem IRQ 3 or 4 which are both
>slow to the claw. Most of the times, it cannot successfully connected at the script.
>I looked up several place in the newsgroup somewhere and finally find the way to
>change the modem to IRQ 10 as same as Win'95 uses. Now, the performance of Linux ppp
>is a whole lot better than Win'95. You can say in ther order that I has been spoiled
>and don't want to go back to Win'95 for Web browsing again. I feel like Linux dial-up
>performance is almost as twice as fast as Win'95.
I use about the same setup. But PPP is about ten times slower on linux
then on win95. I really don't want to go back to win95 after working
with linux , but I think for internet purposes, I'll have no choise.
I have a Pentium 200MMX with a US Robotics Sportster 33.6 modem.
When i download I usually get 400-600 bytes/sec , whereas in win95, I
get 3.x kb/sec
Since I use an external modem , I can't set it's IRQ to 10 ( I don't
have any available IRQ anymore , so that doesn't really matter.)
I do use irqtune , to give high priority 1 to the COM2 port my modem
is connected on.
It always connects fine (31200 - 34600 connects) , but downloads are
very slow.
So .... any tips (other progs, PPPD settings , lock file settings) to
speed it up . I've checked all the help and HOWTO pages about PPP ,
but there aren't many enhancement tips.
bye
Peter Rye
dav...@glo.be (Davy De Waele) writes:
> I use about the same setup. But PPP is about ten times slower on linux
> then on win95. I really don't want to go back to win95 after working
> with linux , but I think for internet purposes, I'll have no choise.
>
> I have a Pentium 200MMX with a US Robotics Sportster 33.6 modem.
>
> When i download I usually get 400-600 bytes/sec , whereas in win95, I
> get 3.x kb/sec
Check that your serial port is set up for "spd_vhi" and crtscts.
This is usually done in /etc/rc.d/rc.serial or similar.
This is my rc.serial, you may need to change the "dev" and use
"spd_vhi" (I only have a 14.4 modem)
#!/bin/sh
setserial /dev/ttyS1 spd_hi
stty crtscts < /dev/ttyS1
setserial -bg /dev/ttyS?
Check that your modem init string enables hardware flow control.
Check that you have "asyncmap 0" and crtscts in your ppp options.
Here's my /etc/ppp/options file. You should probably change the 57600
to 115200 for your faster modem.
connect
"/usr/sbin/chat -v -f /home/prye/.chatscript"
/dev/cua1
57600
lock
-detach
crtscts
modem
idle-disconnect 30
asyncmap 0
defaultroute
I usually get connects of about 1500-1600 bps on a 14.4 modem.
--
Peter Rye <pr...@picu-sgh.demon.co.uk>
Consultant in Paediatric Intensive Care, St. George's Hospital, London, UK
Ph: +44 (0)181 725 1932 Fax: +44 (0)181 725 0089
** Smoking areas in restaurants are like peeing areas in swimming pools. **
Mathew E. Kirsch
Davy De Waele wrote:
> I use about the same setup. But PPP is about ten times slower on
linux
> then on win95. I really don't want to go back to win95 after working
> with linux , but I think for internet purposes, I'll have no choise.
Wrong. Linux works fine in a PPP client situation, and plenty of people,
like me are around to prove it. You simply need the correct set of pppd
parameters.
The first is "asyncmap 0". That gave me the biggest speedup.
Others are crtscts, speed 115200, and modem. speed 38400 won't allow for
any compression on a 33.6 modem, and compression is where you get some
speed boosts.
Also check your serial port setup with setserial. My system has 16550
UARTs, but Linux detected them as 16550AF, and for some reason, I got
another speed boost when I used setserial to change the UART type from
16550AF to 16550.
> I have a Pentium 200MMX with a US Robotics Sportster 33.6 modem.
Processor speed has nothing to do with download speed.
> When i download I usually get 400-600 bytes/sec , whereas in win95, I
> get 3.x kb/sec
> Since I use an external modem , I can't set it's IRQ to 10 ( I don't
> have any available IRQ anymore , so that doesn't really matter.)
One IRQ isn't "faster" than another. You use non-standard IRQs like IRQ
10 if the normal standard IRQs are already being used. That way you
avoid an IRQ conflict.
> I do use irqtune , to give high priority 1 to the COM2 port my modem
> is connected on.
That's one of the enhancement tips.
> So .... any tips (other progs, PPPD settings , lock file settings) to
> speed it up . I've checked all the help and HOWTO pages about PPP ,
> but there aren't many enhancement tips.
Sure there are, they just aren't labeled "ENHANCEMENT TIPS" with big red
letters.
n not g liu
"Mathew E. Kirsch" <kir...@wycol.com> writes:
>Processor speed has nothing to do with download speed.
The exception is when using really high baud rates (like ISDN)...
For a while I was forced to use a pair of 486's - to one side i added a
Hayes ESP, the other was irqtuned to hell and back using a normal on-
board 16550; both sides using 3Com Impact T/As.
Byte loss city.
One direction i could sustain 10k bytes/sec, the other about 3k bytes/sec
(guess which). Suffice it to say i got the cash to upgrade the one with
the 16550's to a P200 and now its all good, with no irqtune hackage.
I may still get a second ESP, but i'm not sure its worth it now...
One happy camper,
Nye
--
,----------------------------------------.
| Turn off your computer and go outside. |
`----------------------------------------'
Geoff Winkless
Davy De Waele wrote in article <34328cbf...@nntp.z09.glo.be>...
>I use about the same setup. But PPP is about ten times slower on linux
>then on win95. I really don't want to go back to win95 after working
>with linux , but I think for internet purposes, I'll have no choise.
>
>get 3.x kb/sec
Are you using BSD Compression? You may have to insmod the compression module
before starting PPP.
Geoff
Peter Steiner
On Thu, 25 Sep 1997 00:47:11 GMT, Davy De Waele <dav...@glo.be> wrote:
>When i download I usually get 400-600 bytes/sec
That's not enough. Linux can do better. I get about 7.5 kB/s with my
external ISDN-modem and the standard-settings work perfectly. And I cannot
even notice any CPU-load.
My first guesses would be a wrong serial line speed, wrong init string for
the modem or so... Maybe you should post your scripts.
F'up: comp.os.linux.setup
Ciao,
Peter Steiner
--
_ x ___
/ \_/_\_ /,--' p.st...@t-online.de (Peter Steiner)
\/>'~~~~//
\_____/ signature V0.2 alpha
James Bourne
Other good speedups are:
bsdcomp 15,15
deflate 15,15 (only good on pppd 2.3.x)
---------------------------------------------
James Bourne
TAPS Development
Telstra Multimedia Pty. Ltd.
Phone: 02 9903 3435
EMail: jbo...@nibupls1.telstra.comdotau
(pls. replace dot with . to email me)
On Sun, 28 Sep 1997 zo...@ionet.net wrote:
> On Thu, 25 Sep 1997 12:23:21 -0400, "Mathew E. Kirsch"
> <kir...@wycol.com> wrote:
> <snip>
> >The first is "asyncmap 0". That gave me the biggest speedup.
> >Others are crtscts, speed 115200, and modem. speed 38400 won't allow for
> >any compression on a 33.6 modem, and compression is where you get some
> >speed boosts.
> that async tip did wonders! thanks!
>
> Zool
>
> "Rust is Iron's Flame"
>
>
Alejandro Vega Soto (SSLCI)
>
> I am using a 28800 modem and my minicom setup is configured for a baud rate
> of 38400.
> I connect to my ISP at a connection speed of 28800.
> As soon as I run netscape or FTP to anywhere the speed is very slow.
> My win95 installation goes better than this!!
> Is there a configuration file that I have missed or something??
> Any help would be greatly appreciated as I want to blow Win95 away
> altogether :-)
>
> Does anybody have any ideas??
>
> Regards,
> Aaron Saikovski
>
>
>
1) if you are using an external modem , and your port is NOT an UART1650
you maximum conexion speed will be (and can't be changed) 9600 bps.
2) is your line doesn't support that speed of data transmision . or you
have make a mistake in your line configuration in modem settings
Anyway , better throw away win95 and install , a recent version of Linux ,
it's much better .
Alejandro Vega
L.C.I.
Robert Price
Set the baud rate to 115200. This is actually the speed between the
computer and modem I believe.
--
Robert Price
e-mail: bobprice at enteract dot com
"When I die, God has a _lot_ of explaining to do."
9177...@compuserve.com
>>
>> I am using a 28800 modem and my minicom setup is configured for a baud rate
>> of 38400.
>> I connect to my ISP at a connection speed of 28800.
>> As soon as I run netscape or FTP to anywhere the speed is very slow.
>> My win95 installation goes better than this!!
>> Is there a configuration file that I have missed or something??
What excatly do you mean when you say the speed is very slow?
28800 is your data rate from your computer to your ISP and that can't
change once the modems have decided on the top data speed-- 28k in
your case. If you are saying the speed is very slow during a
download, (ie: 1.6-2.3 kps) then Windoz or Linux is not the influence.
The speed in this case is all to do with the web site you have
contacted. The Super Highway is more like a Super Side Street, or
Super Parking Lot. Setting the computer to port speed at say 115200
certainly will speed things up, ie: throws more data at the 16550xxx
fifo buffers....it won't speed up the transfer of data from the modem
to your ISP. Looks good tho to impress the unknowning.
ed
FOR SALE FOR SALE FOR SALE FOR SALE FOR SALE
Nauga Ranch for sale
Beautiful 50k acres of
Prime ranch land in
West Texas.
Complete with buildings
and 30k head of livestock.
Serious enquires only.
email: nauga...@ialinux.des-moines.ia.us
Geoff Winkless
9177...@compuserve.com <9177...@compuserve.com> wrote in article
<343149b7...@news.netins.net>...
>What excatly do you mean when you say the speed is very slow?
>28800 is your data rate from your computer to your ISP and that can't
>change once the modems have decided on the top data speed-- 28k in
>your case.
Have you ever actually used a computer?
You have? oh, I was beginning to wonder...
>Setting the computer to port speed at say 115200
>certainly will speed things up, ie: throws more data at the 16550xxx
>fifo buffers....it won't speed up the transfer of data from the modem
>to your ISP. Looks good tho to impress the unknowning.
However the modem does some compression before it sends info down the line.
If you're sending a maximum baud rate of 38400 DTE, the modem may be able to
compress more than that, and thus there will be less data coming down the
line from your ISP to your computer.
Geoff