FTP ASCII vs binary "image" | NTLFN issues (Announce)
The default transfer mode is set by the FTP server. Arachne is stuffing a 'BIN' command in the command stream for you - see the 'TYPE I' message. I don't do that in my FTP client because that assumes that the FTP client knows more about the file being transferred than the user, which is not something that a program should do.
I just downloaded that same file (guitool.pdf) twice. The first download took 67.76 seconds, and the second took 67.32 seconds. That is an average rate of 70KB/sec for this machine, which is a 386-40 with an NE2000 Ethernet card. I don't remember the particulars of your machine, but I know it is far faster and it should be doing better. I think that your experience is atypical and that you either have packet driver or hardware problems because you are getting far lower performance than you should, and mTCP is reporting the dropped packets for you.
It's possible that Arachne is doing better in that situation because it's handling the dropped packets better. I'm sure that WATTCP is doing Round Trip Time calculations, where mTCP is just using a fixed timeout value. But still, on a fast PCI bus machine like yours you should be doing far better than you are. So comparing the results of something that probably isn't working right doesn't make a lot of sense.
Please post the details on this machine - CPU and Ethernet card type. And ry it on another machine - unless your network is horrible I'm sure the results will be vastly different. My 386-40 should not be anywhere near close to your PCI bus based machine.
---
mTCP - TCP/IP apps for vintage DOS machines!
http://www.brutman.com/mTCP
Complete thread:
- mTCP DOS TCP/IP apps for small machines - mbbrutman, 21.01.2010, 18:06 (Announce)
![Open in board view [Board]](img/board_d.gif)
![Open in mix view [Mix]](img/mix_d.gif)
- mTCP DOS TCP/IP apps for small machines - Japheth, 22.01.2010, 09:47
- mTCP DOS TCP/IP apps for small machines - mbbrutman, 22.01.2010, 16:56
- mTCP DOS TCP/IP apps for small machines - mbbrutman, 07.02.2010, 16:35
- Forget the library .. time to open-source the code? - mbbrutman, 14.03.2010, 03:22
- Forget the library .. time to open-source the code? - Rugxulo, 14.03.2010, 03:56
- Forget the library .. time to open-source the code? - mbbrutman, 14.03.2010, 15:01
- mTCP new release 27/June/2010 - now ported to Open Watcom - Arjay, 27.06.2010, 22:27
- mTCP new release 27/June/2010 - now ported to Open Watcom - Rugxulo, 28.06.2010, 06:30
- mTCP new release 27/June/2010 - now ported to Open Watcom - DOS386, 28.06.2010, 12:05
- mTCP new release 27/June/2010 - now ported to Open Watcom - Arjay, 28.06.2010, 14:22
- mTCP new release 27/June/2010 - now ported to Open Watcom - mbbrutman, 01.07.2010, 07:08
- mTCP new release 27/June/2010 - now ported to Open Watcom - Laaca, 01.07.2010, 13:14
- mTCP new release 27/June/2010 - now ported to Open Watcom - mbbrutman, 01.07.2010, 16:06
- mTCP new release 27/June/2010 - now ported to Open Watcom - DOS386, 01.07.2010, 13:20
- mTCP new release 27/June/2010 - now ported to Open Watcom - mbbrutman, 01.07.2010, 16:03
- mTCP new release 27/June/2010 - now ported to Open Watcom - Laaca, 01.07.2010, 19:16
- mTCP new release 27/June/2010 - now ported to Open Watcom - mbbrutman, 03.07.2010, 16:04
- mTCP new release 27/June/2010 - now ported to Open Watcom - DOS386, 14.07.2010, 03:51
- mTCP new release 27/June/2010 - now ported to Open Watcom - Laaca, 01.07.2010, 19:16
- mTCP new release 27/June/2010 - now ported to Open Watcom - mbbrutman, 01.07.2010, 16:03
- mTCP new release 27/June/2010 - now ported to Open Watcom - Laaca, 01.07.2010, 13:14
- mTCP new release 27/June/2010 - now ported to Open Watcom - mbbrutman, 01.07.2010, 07:08
- mTCP new release 27/June/2010 - now ported to Open Watcom - Arjay, 28.06.2010, 14:22
- mTCP new release 27/June/2010 - now ported to Open Watcom - DOS386, 28.06.2010, 12:05
- mTCP new release 27/June/2010 - now ported to Open Watcom - Rugxulo, 28.06.2010, 06:30
- mTCP new release 27/June/2010 - now ported to Open Watcom - Arjay, 27.06.2010, 22:27
- Forget the library .. time to open-source the code? - mbbrutman, 14.03.2010, 15:01
- Forget the library .. time to open-source the code? - Rugxulo, 14.03.2010, 03:56
- mTCP DOS TCP/IP apps for small machines - mbbrutman, 22.01.2010, 16:56
- mTCP interfacing with TINY remote control for DOS? - Arjay, 20.07.2010, 12:41
- mTCP interfacing with TINY remote control for DOS? - mbbrutman, 20.07.2010, 16:09
- mTCP interfacing with TINY remote control for DOS? - Arjay, 20.07.2010, 17:49
- mTCP interfacing with TINY remote control for DOS? - mbbrutman, 20.07.2010, 16:09
- mTCP DOS - NC documentation issue (design bug)? - Arjay, 20.07.2010, 14:07
- mTCP DOS - NC documentation issue (design bug)? - mbbrutman, 20.07.2010, 15:22
- mTCP DOS - NC documentation issue (design bug)? - Arjay, 20.07.2010, 17:30
- mTCP DOS - NC documentation issue (design bug)? - mbbrutman, 20.07.2010, 19:32
- mTCP DOS - NC documentation issue (design bug)? - Arjay, 20.07.2010, 21:56
- FTP ASCII vs binary "image" - DOS386, 23.07.2010, 07:27
- FTP ASCII vs binary "image" - mbbrutman, 24.07.2010, 01:04
- FTP ASCII vs binary "image" - DOS386, 24.07.2010, 12:12
- FTP ASCII vs binary "image" - Japheth, 24.07.2010, 15:31
- FTP ASCII vs binary "image" - DOS386, 24.07.2010, 15:36
- FTP ASCII vs binary "image" - mbbrutman, 24.07.2010, 16:23
- FTP ASCII vs binary "image" - Japheth, 24.07.2010, 16:57
- FTP ASCII vs binary "image" - mbbrutman, 25.07.2010, 01:35
- FTP ASCII vs binary "image" - Rugxulo, 25.07.2010, 05:34
- FTP ASCII vs binary "image" - DOS386, 25.07.2010, 06:16
- FTP ASCII vs binary "image" - mbbrutman, 25.07.2010, 17:17
- FTP ASCII vs binary "image" | NTLFN issues - DOS386, 26.07.2010, 02:03
- FTP ASCII vs binary "image" | NTLFN issues - mbbrutman, 26.07.2010, 03:11
- FTP ASCII vs binary "image" | NTLFN issues - DOS386, 27.07.2010, 02:53
- FTP ASCII vs binary "image" | NTLFN issues - mbbrutman, 27.07.2010, 03:31
- FTP ASCII vs binary "image" | NTLFN issues - DOS386, 27.07.2010, 03:40
- FTP ASCII vs binary "image" | NTLFN issues - mbbrutman, 27.07.2010, 03:31
- FTP ASCII vs binary "image" | NTLFN issues - DOS386, 27.07.2010, 02:53
- FTP ASCII vs binary "image" | NTLFN issues - mbbrutman, 26.07.2010, 03:11
- FTP ASCII vs binary "image" | NTLFN issues - DOS386, 26.07.2010, 02:03
- FTP ASCII vs binary "image" - mbbrutman, 25.07.2010, 17:17
- FTP ASCII vs binary "image" - DOS386, 25.07.2010, 06:16
- FTP ASCII vs binary "image" - Rugxulo, 25.07.2010, 05:34
- FTP ASCII vs binary "image" - mbbrutman, 25.07.2010, 01:35
- FTP ASCII vs binary "image" - Japheth, 24.07.2010, 16:57
- FTP ASCII vs binary "image" - Japheth, 24.07.2010, 15:31
- FTP ASCII vs binary "image" - DOS386, 24.07.2010, 12:12
- FTP ASCII vs binary "image" - mbbrutman, 24.07.2010, 01:04
- mTCP DOS - NC documentation issue (design bug)? - mbbrutman, 20.07.2010, 19:32
- mTCP DOS - NC documentation issue (design bug)? - Arjay, 20.07.2010, 17:30
- mTCP DOS - NC documentation issue (design bug)? - mbbrutman, 20.07.2010, 15:22
- mTCP DOS TCP/IP apps for small machines - Japheth, 22.01.2010, 09:47
Mix view