need for RTS/CTS at high speeds (was re: SCO RTS/CTS Setup)

[Pete Holsberg]

In article <1991Apr10.010317.22511 at netcom.COM> gandrews at netcom.COM (Greg Andrews) writes:
=In article <1991Apr8.173125.22219 at mccc.edu> pjh at mccc.edu (Pete Holsberg) writes:
=>A computer magazine recently tested a number of communications programs
=>at various speeds and published the results.  They said that at higher
=>transfer rates (57.6K and 115.2K), they used RTS/CTS handshaking because
=>(I'm paraphrasing) that's what you had to use when you had high speed
=>modems.  This puzzled me because I've been using Trailblazers at their
=>maximum speed for a couple of years now, with either no or XON/XOFF
=>handshaking.  Could someone enlighten me?
=>
=
=(sounds like the PC Mag review - no comment)

Aw, you found me out!  And please *do* comment.  That was really the
point of my posting, because they found that certain programs ran MUCH
faster when they did not use RTS/CTS (over a null modem) that when they did!!

=If the data flow across your TrailBlazers doesn't use XON/XOFF then you
=probably wouldn't have encountered the above problems with XON/XOFF.
=Running uucp transfers with PEP-mode spoofing in the TrailBlazers doesn't
=count because the modems automatically turn off their XON/XOFF control
=when the transfer begins.

Sure, that's what I've been doing.  No wonder I didn't have any trouble!
;-)

Pete 
-- 
Prof. Peter J. Holsberg      Mercer County Community College
Voice: 609-586-4800          Engineering Technology, Computers and Math
UUCP:...!princeton!mccc!pjh  1200 Old Trenton Road, Trenton, NJ 08690
Internet: pjh at mccc.edu	     Trenton Computer Festival -- 4/20-21/91