On Mon, 1 Mar 2004, Thomas Miller wrote:

>> A "up to 5 Mbps" connection cannot deliver 610KB/sec
>> via FTP. Something like 550KB/sec is more realistic,
>> but it could be lower depending on the encoding used
>> on your uplink.
>
>Well, if 550 KB/sec is reasonable, then it ought
>to be faster than 320-something (see below).
>
>Not that I _need_ the connection to be faster.
>It just seems that I should be able to download
>at least sometimes from somewhere at a speed that
>kinda sorta looks a little like the number the
>ISP uses to describe the connection.  :-)

If you _need_ that bandwidth, then you should go to a guaranteed service,
rather than a contended service.

But that's why leased lines are so expensive...

>
>> Can you verify that you use binary FTP transfers ?
>
>I tried my test again tonight just to make sure
>about binary transfers.  The NetBSD ftp client
>does say, "150 Opening BINARY mode data
>connection. . . ."
>
>Results tonight as reported by the ftp client were
>320.30 KB/sec with net.inet.tcp.recvspace set at
>32768 and 326.78 with recvspace of 65536.
>
>Again, this is from my ISP's ftp mirror server.

For testing purposes, ask your ISP to switch you back to "up to 3Mb/s" and
repeat the tests. If there is no difference, then you may have grounds for
complaint.

It might also be worth testing the connection with another operating
system to rule out or otherwise NetBSD, preferably Linux as it has a
completely different TCP/IP implementation to *BSD.

Christian

-- 
"The problem with the French is that they don't have a word for entrepreneur"
  George W. Bush

----------------------------------------------------------------------
    /"\
    \ /    ASCII RIBBON CAMPAIGN - AGAINST HTML MAIL
     X                           - AGAINST MS ATTACHMENTS
    / \