> Graeme Fowler wrote:
> > ISTR it was a halfway house - arithmetic mean - between two opposing
> > camps, one of whom wanted larger (for data) and one smaller (for
> > voice).
>
> Yes (Europeans wanted 32, U$ wanted 64 bits) however I cannot recall
It's worse than that, one camp the voice ppl demanded a max cell size of 32,
to avoid infitessimal delays to their data, and the data camp demanded a
mimimum cell size of 64, as anything less is hopelessly ineffiecient.
Then the judgement of Solomon split the diff to 48 and noone was happy!
> interconnects. I actually think ATM is the best thing since sliced bread
> and certainly wish I had it here on my desktop...
I'd like to be able to afford ATM on my desktop, but I'd spend the money on
better things, like fast cars, and faster women...
Interestingly enough Gigabit Ethernet suffers from a similar problem, with
the 'relatively' enormous MTU of 1500 (cf 48), and the interrupt is far too
high to actually get 1,000Mb/s, though some implementations were permitting
much larger MTU's and getting the full whack (albeit breaking the standard).
Rob
--------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.lug.org.uk http://www.linuxportal.co.uk
http://www.linuxjob.co.uk http://www.linuxshop.co.uk
--------------------------------------------------------------------
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Thu 22 Nov 2001 - 13:12:13 GMT