Re: difference (fwd)
Marty Likier (marty@livingston.com)
Sat, 7 Dec 1996 19:54:25 -0800 (PST)
>
>On Sat, 7 Dec 1996, Nick Hilliard wrote:
>
>> There's an interesting article on the performance of various terminal
>> servers in http://www.data.com/lab_tests/remote_servers.html. The Ascend
>> 4000 is included and doesn't fare well at all.
>>
>> Nick
>
> Yes, true. Take these results with a grain of salt. In this
>article comparisons are made between the call setup times (modem handshake
>+ PPP login) between various units. The MAX 4000 results are just plain
>wrong in this case. The problem with the test was that the "Enable
>software compression" was left enabled. This forces the MAX to sort out
>whether the client is using Stac or MS-Stac compression (the MAX supports
>both), which takes much longer. If this option is disabled call setup
>time is reduced dramatically.
>
>
However this doesn't explain why the MAX's performance collapsed after 16
concurrent sessions. You just give a believeable reason why the MAX call
completion time was so long compared to the other products. ;-)
--Marty
****************************************************************
Marty Likier Livingston Worldwide Headquarters
Product Marketing Mgr. 4464 Willow Road
(800) 458-9966 Pleasanton, CA 94588 USA
(510) 737-2164 (510) 244-1903 (FAX)
marty@livingston.com Web: www.livingston.com
****************************************************************