Ascend Archive
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: (ASCEND) Zoom 1.002A code



On Fri, 29 Aug 1997, Jake Messinger wrote:

> On Fri, 29 Aug 1997, Joseph Bridgewater wrote:
> 
> > It's the signal power level allowed to be placed onto the phone network.
> > In order to achieve a 56k connection, the signal would require higher power
> > to be applied to the network.  FCC regulations limit the power level to a
> > point that only allows 53k connections.
> 
> Okay so the FCC specified the signal power and not the actual K thruput.
> I figured so. So kflex CAN or cannot do 56k? And x2 CAN or CANNOT do 56k?
> And why am I even asking when the FASTEST Ive seen so far is 44k.

USR claims 53k is their limit.  I've heard that rockwell and lucent can
get 56000 rates without violating this power limit, but I haven't
confirmed this.

About fast connect rates- under the most ideal conditions possible (which
required pulling some strings)- I've seen 48k.  Also, on an ISDN pots
line, I've seen 50k.  As to comparing performance of KFlex and X2- also
under ideal condtions: KFlex is about 0.8k/sec slower transferring
pre-compressed data than X2.  KFlex is also about 1.2k/sec faster at
transferring -highly- compressible data than X2.  If you figure that most
data is even 50% comprised of compressible and non-compressible data, the
performance of KFlex and X2 average out to be nearly identical.  As far as
I'm concerned, KFlex and X2 are doing almost exactly the same thing to
transfer data, and there is virtually no design differences that make one
protocol faster than the other.  By the way, I saw speeds up to 11.2k/sec
on the compressible data (which was words from a unix /usr/dict/words
file).  This is near enough to a serial port speed setting of 1,115,200 to
make further tests of even more highly compressible data useless.

Though this isn't really the most appropriate place to talk about X2 vs.
KFlex-- I just want to point out that USR licensed their routing code for
the Total Control server from Livingston some time ago.  Livingston has
refused to renew this contract- which expires in September of this year
(to the best of my knowledge.)  A USR sales rep who visited us said they
had their own code in beta-- this was about 4 weeks ago.  I fully expect
USR to have a major breakdown in software reliability in their new units
shipped after September.  I am far more impressed by Ascend's software
than livingston's in all areas except one.  Livingston seems to make more
bug-free software than Ascend.  But the features and options possible with
Ascend's OS completely blow away Livingston's ComOS, hands down.  So, in
spite of not seeing download speeds, or as MegaZone oft repeats-
regardless of the inability to limit connections based on baud rate,
there's a lot more you can do with MAXes than a PortMaster, any day.
(Provided you're at version 5.0A or later, :-)

-Will

--
Will Pierce
System Administrator
Dreamscape Online, LLC.
willp@dreamscape.com


++ Ascend Users Mailing List ++
To unsubscribe:	send unsubscribe to ascend-users-request@bungi.com
To get FAQ'd:	<http://www.nealis.net/ascend/faq>
Follow-Ups: References: