Re: Developing PLATOTerm64, Flow Control woes.

From: smf <smf_at_null.net>
Date: Sat, 7 Jul 2018 23:49:52 +0100
Message-ID: <b2461bf1-7acc-c309-4e51-52c1e6082a12@null.net>
On 06/07/2018 20:56, Mike Stein wrote:
>
> Perhaps. I take it to mean that if I send an XOFF then the other end receives an XOFF, whether it is actually sent as a character in the data stream or regenerated locally; I assume you mean the latter.

End to end flow control would be that you would send an xoff character, 
the bridge would pass it through without acting on it, the receiving 
bridge would pass it to the rs232 device on the other end, which would 
then stop sending data, but any data already sent will be delivered.

If on the other hand the xoff stops your local bridge from sending data 
to you, then it's not end to end. Instead it's local.

I've explained this multiple times, so I don't understand why you would 
assume the opposite of what I meant. It seems like a troll.

> Either you had a bad experience with software flow control in your youth or you just like to argue,

I disageed that whether you are being sent packets or single characters 
is irrelevant because the flow control should happen at a higher level & 
then you seemed to start misunderstanding and disagreeing with 
everything I said out of principle.

>   but I obviously can't persuade you that *properly configured*, XON/XOFF 'just works' over a network,
I've not been discussing properly configured XOFF/XON, I've used it 
enough to know what works and what doesn't. The whole point of this 
thread was to point out improperly configured XOFF/XON to help the OP 
with his problem.
>    the only real issue usually being the receive buffer size vs. the packet size as I said in my original post.

Send fifo depth, receive buffer size, the threshold and the latency 
between queuing an xoff and the data stopping are the only relevant 
things. Packet size shouldn't affect it at all.

The only way for the latency to be low enough is if the local bridge 
processes it and stops sending you data until you send it an xon.

> Re the OP's question(s): sounds like his issue didn't really get solved very well if he ended up just throttling the data instead of any real flow control.

Right, which is why I was suggesting things that could have caused his 
original problem. But you started saying that it would still work if 
misconfigured the way I was describing.
Received on 2018-07-08 01:00:04

Archive generated by hypermail 2.2.0.