[MUD-Dev] Re: Question regarding Java threads
Chris Gray
cg at ami-cg.GraySage.Edmonton.AB.CA
Thu Aug 6 08:00:24 CEST 1998
[Vadim Tkachenko:]
>> Character-mode telnet connections are indeed evil. They consume far
>> more resources than a line-mode telnet connection.
>
>What is clear, is that the line mode allows buffering and utilizes the
>protocol features better than character mode. Also, the interim solution
>is WON'T ECHO, DO ECHO, if I remember it right, so the echo wouldn't
>travel back and forth. Is there anything else which is a reason for such
>evilness?
The order of magnitude increase in packets is my main concern. The
higher typing latency for the user is another. Also, as I believed I
mentioned in a previous note, my experience with trying to use
DO ECHO and DONT ECHO to toggle the client's echoing of passwords
just doesn't work in many telnet clients.
>> Of course the full solution is for everyone to use my not-yet-written
>> Java client, which connects in a binary mode which doesn't even have
>> the concept of a character mode. :-/
>
>Hold on a second, I might forget some details, but isn't it right that a
>character mode _IS_ a binary mode with the command sequences in between?
Depends on your definitions, I guess. I look at character mode as just
being an 8 bit character mode that has a few escape conventions. A true
binary mode doesn't need any escapes since each packet has a binary
header that contains any needed control information. So, a binary
mode transmits slightly more data, but it always does so as larger packets.
--
Chris Gray cg at ami-cg.GraySage.Edmonton.AB.CA
More information about the mud-dev-archive
mailing list