Re: [tlug] Bittorrent Newbie

[Edward Middleton <edward@example.com>]

Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
>     Stephen> Er, that's optimistic.  There is _no_ technical definition,
>     Stephen>at least not that I could recognize in the first ten pages of  
>     Stephen> Google output for "bandwidth efficiency definition dictionary".  
>     Stephen> From that sample "bandwidth efficiency" seems to be a marketing   
>     Stephen> buzzword for "effective use of available bandwidth".  

>     Edward> My source is Fred Halsall "Data Communications, Computer
>     Edward> Networks and Open Systems."  ISBN 0-201-42293 page 38.  

> You're welcome to mail me the book, so I can
> check that source. ;-)  
I would, but I think a visit to the library would do you more good.

>     Scott> Oddly enough, though it's supposed to be *faster*, I've
>     Scott> always found it slower than standard *downloads* of ISOs.
>
>     Stephen> No, it's *supposed* to be slower,
>
>     Edward> It is supposed to be less bandwidth efficient, not slower.
>
> Stephen> No, it's supposed be more bandwidth efficient ...,
> Stephen> and slower.
>
> Stephen> I choose to view this from a global standpoint, ie, maximum
> Stephen> network flow, not maximum flow for an individual downloader.
>
> Edward> It is not for you to choose as I made the statement and it was
> Edward> addressing your response to Scots observation that downloads speed
> Edward> seemed slower using bittorrent.

In Scotts statement *Slower* is clearly related to *download speed*, not "network flow" in general.

OK?

Edward