netcurmudgeon (netcurmudgeon) wrote,

  • Mood:
  • Music:

A stray thought

Telnet has got to be the most inefficient protocol out there when it comes to bytes of information sent vs. bytes of header. If you're telnetted into some box, and you're typing out an email, or fiddling with some script, each and every keystroke generates an IP frame from you to the host. If you're holding down a key and your typematic rate is set to really caffeinated you'll get a couple of repetitions of the key per frame. But that's pretty much it.

So, how bad is it? Well, looking at a packet capture, you've got one byte of telnet data (an ASCII character) wrapped in a TCP header (20 bytes), wrapped in an IP header (20 more bytes), wrapped in an Ethernet frame header (14 bytes). All told, 54 bytes of overhead to send one byte of data. Fifty-four to one.

The only way to send more data than header is to cut-and-paste a pile of text into your terminal window. Then you'll get frames where there is more steak than sizzle.

The good news is that this is Telnet we're talking about. Grossly inefficient as it is, it sill walks very lightly on the paths of the network. Unlike, say, mulitcast video.

Just thought you might want to know.

  • Post a new comment


    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    Your IP address will be recorded 

    When you submit the form an invisible reCAPTCHA check will be performed.
    You must follow the Privacy Policy and Google Terms of use.