Subj : Re: kermit protocol in syncterm
To : Digital Man
From : fusion
Date : Fri Aug 18 2023 08:23 pm
On 18 Aug 2023, Digital Man said the following...
DM> YMODEM-G is a protocl. gkermit is a terminal transfer protocol driver.
DM> You're comparing apples and oranges. If you want to compare X/Y/ZMODEM
DM> protocol performance, you should be comparing with the reference
DM> X/Y/ZMODEM protocol implementation (rz/sz).
sorry i misspoke. i can see gkermit (and by extension, kermit. just to spell it out) outperforming sexyz's ymodem-g.
you asserted ymodem-g shouldn't have any overhead and should be as fast or
faster than kermit. is that in theory? because i tested ymodem-g with sexyz
and it performs extremely poorly with incredible overhead. (again, sexyz->syncterm)
if i compare to the reference implementation of rz/sz what am i trying to prove? that sexyz's ymodem-g (or zmodem) works better with the reference implementation than with itself? or am i proving both perform poorly compared to kermit?
you mentioned zmodem shouldn't be far /behind/, yet it performs better than
ymodem-g with sexyz.
people are easily using it correctly and getting poor results where they shouldn't be. so they try kermit and it blows sexyz out of the water. after which you chime in and say "use ymodem-g it should be even better!" .. well i'm saying that doesn't pan out in real life.
--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A47 2021/12/25 (Windows/32)
* Origin: cold fusion - cfbbs.net - grand rapids, mi
