Great Circle Associates Firewalls
(November 1994)
 

Indexed By Date: [Previous] [Next] Indexed By Thread: [Previous] [Next]

Subject: IPX Protocol Overhead (FW: IPX, and packet flooding.)
From: "Glassey, Todd @ ITD Ma" <TGLASSEY @ MSM . EPRI . COM>
Date: 04 Nov 1994 08:24:08 PST
To: firewalls @ greatcircle . com
Comment: MEMO


OK, well, here is one solid negative for the IPX world... Are there are there
any real studies that compare the actual protocols and their respective
overheads... I would be real interested in this since I am in the process of
trying to kill of NOVELL from my entire site... (Gimmee back my bullets - Lynard
Skynard)   SO if you have any real numbers please send them to me... I will
summarize.


Todd
tglassey @
 eprinet .
 epri .
 com
Electric Power Research Institute
IT - Network Services
Palo Alto California
(415) 855-7973
_______________________________________________________________________________
From: SMTP.PAUL on Thu, Nov 3, 1994 8:44 PM
Subject: Re: IPX, and packet flooding.
To: "J. Adams" <jna @
 concorde .
 com>; Glassey, Todd @
 ITD Mail Center #2286
Cc: firewalls @
 GreatCircle .
 COM

Received: from RELAY3.UU.NET by SSW.EPRI.COM
        (Soft*Switch Central V4L380P6);
        03 Nov 1994 20:42:18 PST
Received: from miles.greatcircle.com by relay3.UU.NET with ESMTP
        id QQxona12222; Thu, 3 Nov 1994 23:40:50 -0500
Received: (daemon @
 localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id
MAA12976 for firewalls-outgoing; Thu, 3 Nov 1994 12:52:17 -0800
Received: from hawksbill.sprintmrn.com (hawksbill.sprintmrn.com [199.11.1.3]) by
miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with SMTP id MAA12946 for
<firewalls @
 GreatCircle .
 COM>; Thu, 3 Nov 1994 12:49:44 -0800
Received: by hawksbill.sprintmrn.com (5.65/1.34)
        id AA28408; Thu, 3 Nov 94 15:47:25 -0500
From: paul @
 hawksbill .
 sprintmrn .
 com (Paul Ferguson)
Message-Id: <9411032047 .
 AA28408 @
 hawksbill .
 sprintmrn .
 com>
Subject: Re: IPX, and packet flooding.
To: jna @
 concorde .
 com (J. Adams)
Date: Thu, 3 Nov 1994 15:47:25 -0500 (EST)
Cc: firewalls @
 GreatCircle .
 COM
In-Reply-To: <9411031813 .
 AA27490 @
 oracle .
 concorde .
 com> from "J. Adams" at Nov 3,
94 01:13:27 pm
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL22]
Content-Type: text
Content-Length: 895
Sender: firewalls-owner @
 GreatCircle .
 COM
Precedence: bulk


>
>
> Speaking of IPX, IPX seems to transmit TONS of useless ack and frag
> packets, nearly all the time. Anyone have any idea what's behind this?
> Or is it just sloppy novell code? We
> always see a high network load on our PC segments, but the unix boxes
> which are obviously more powerful and doing more for our net (gopher,www,
> mail,etc...) work at much lower loads.
>
> -john
>

Its a protocol thing. IPX is a pig-dog, resource-sucking protocol.

IP is simply cleaner and doesn't rely on any silly service advertisements
for services.

Whats the difference betwen an apple and a grapefruit?

- paul


_______________________________________________________________________________
Paul Ferguson
US Sprint
Managed Network Engineering                        tel: 703.689.6828
Reston, Virginia  USA                         internet: paul @
 hawk .
 sprintmrn .
 com





Indexed By Date Previous: Re: IP forwarding and ndd under Solaris 2.x
From: mulligan @ future . incog . com
Next: Re: Looking for sys admin info
From: "Shashi Shekhar" <csfb1!sshekhar @ uunet . uu . net>
Indexed By Thread Previous: Re: Firewalls built on SCO UNIX
From: prologic!sar @ uunet . uu . net
Next: Sidewinder: The Challenge
From: Earl Boebert <boebert @ gateway . sctc . com>

Google
 
Search Internet Search www.greatcircle.com