Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!rick
From: rick@seismo.CSS.GOV (Rick Adams)
Newsgroups: news.groups,news.misc,news.stargate,news.sysadmin,news.admin
Subject: Re: EndOfSourcesList+AnnouncementOfNetOmbudsman -- communication?
Message-ID: <44009@beno.seismo.CSS.GOV>
Date: Sun, 5-Jul-87 23:25:00 EDT
Article-I.D.: beno.44009
Posted: Sun Jul  5 23:25:00 1987
Date-Received: Mon, 6-Jul-87 06:37:26 EDT
References: <266@brandx.rutgers.edu> <8225@utzoo.UUCP> <272@brandx.rutgers.edu> <961@van-bc.UUCP>
Organization: Center for Seismic Studies, Arlington, VA
Lines: 20
Keywords: solving the moderation bottleneck
Summary: uunet theoretical capacity
Xref: mnetor news.groups:1174 news.misc:696 news.stargate:227 news.sysadmin:273 news.admin:617

> Actually, I was wondering how many UUNET's it would take. In the original
> posting Rick Adams mentioned that it could handle 25 simultaneous
> connections (uucico). This should be able support over 100 and full feed 
> connections. Probably more with appropriate hardware upgrades. 

In theory, the UUNET machine can support 4 56 kbps lines. Thats about 100
simultaneous 2400 bps connections (200 1200 bps connections). It seems that
1 32032 processor can handle 2.5 uucico's, so the balance 21000 would
max out at about 70 uucicos. However, upgrading to the new 386 based
processors should provide enough CPU to find some other bottleneck.

Basically, there is a hell of a lot of growth potential in the current
system before it would "have" to be split into several machines. (It
might be "desirable" to split it before that.)

So, the current UUNET machine could theoretically be expanded to support
about 10% of the known USENET machines.

---rick