At 05:04 5/27/96 -0400, Jim wrote:
>Could I please request all you dear people to be careful when quoting from
>previous postings in your replies?
>We have just had a prime example as to what a mail overload can do to a
>system. Let's do *our* bit to prevent it happening again.
>
Jim:
I couldn't agree more with the need to be judicial in our use
of repetetive message transmission. We don't see how many messages
transfer per unit of time and are only concerned with the message
we are currently sending.
If you set your modem speed to 4800 Baud (roughly translated to
4800 Bits per second; roughly 600 characters per second; roughly
120 words per second;) you will see the difference in receiving
the mail from the net. This is what could happen to us if we
continue to transmit 'extra' information in our messages as the
network grows. While 120 words per second sounds like lightning
speed to us now, as we increase the load on the network the time
required to send this data will take longer and longer because
each message has a considerable amount of overhead to get it
from origination to the destination points. This paragraph has
about 1 seconds worth of transmission time consumed.
The above paragraph has about 120 words in it and what did I
say? Nothing.............so I'll shut up!
Have a good day everyone!...........Jack
***********************************************************
E. Jack Savely CG for Jeannette 57/19+ Topeka, KS
[log in to unmask]
***********************************************************
KANSAS - 'THE WHEAT STATE' HOME OF THE SUNFLOWER AND 'TOTO'
Ad Astra per Aspera - 'To the Stars through Difficulty'
***********************************************************
