Ahh, I see. I will try and pay another visit to it tomorrow via a landline connection. I would do it tonight, but I don't have the time. Regards, Andrew B aliensrcooluk at yahoo.co.uk --- On Sun, 21/6/09, Michael B. Brutman <mbbrutman-cctalk at brutman.com> wrote: From: Michael B. Brutman <mbbrutman-cctalk at brutman.com> Subject: Re: PCjr Telnet BBS Test To: "On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts" <cctalk at classiccmp.org> Date: Sunday, 21 June, 2009, 12:16 AM Andrew Burton wrote: Cosam and I were talking about it and the right neurons fired in my brain. Back in December I made a change to the way I measure elapsed time.? The change gave me like a 30% performance improvement because my original code was so bad, and the new code was counting timer ticks which is pretty easy.? When I made the change I changed all of my units of time measurement from 100ths of seconds to milliseconds. Except in the configuration file that defines the timeouts for the BBS. :-) The result is that I'm retransmitting packets if I don't get an acknowledgment in 0.4 seconds, not the 4 seconds that I intended.? Which? explains why your particular modem connection was driving the retransmits so hard.? Most broad-band users don't have that problem. It's not bad enough to stop and restart the BBS, but it definitely is exercising that path in the code pretty hard. Mike