HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: dgm@shell.portal.com (David G Metzger)
Subject: Re: USR Sportster Info Needed!REGISTER
Organization: Portal Communications Company -- 408/973-9111 (voice) 408/725-0561 (data)
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 07:52:03 GMT

In article <wwf1.718561223@Ra.MsState.Edu> wwf1@Ra.MsState.Edu (Bill Ford) writes:
>eadie5295@iscsvax.uni.edu writes:
>
>>  I would like to know all of the info on the new 14.4 Sportster (w/fax).
>>I would also like to know if it has the 16550 UART and if it will initiate a
>>fall-forward (and other neat-oh stuff).
>
   [...]
>I am pretty sure I have watched my Sportster fall forward after it fell
>back after hitting my 16450's limit.  I assume this is the HST ASL feature?
>(Yes, this is in DS mode.)  As far as the original poster's question,
>the external doesn't have a 16550 in it, and the internal doesn't need it,
>obviously.  Your serial port is what you need to look at for the external.

    ???? The use of a 16450 or other UART has nothing to do with falling
forward, or back.  The modem will never know that characters to your system
were dropped.  Further, the internal Sportster DOES have a 16550A installed,
and to avoid dropped characters, a 16550A or some other well buffered UART
is a must in any internal high-speed modem on the PC .

   [ ... ]

>---------------------------------------------------------------------------.
>|  Bill Ford: wwf1@isis.msstate.edu |   Miss'ippi State University          | 
>|        Or : wwf1@ra.msstate.edu   |      "Moo."                           |
>`---------------------------------------------------------------------------'


--

-----------------------------------------------------------------
                                    Dave Metzger
                                    dgm@shell.portal.com
From: wwf1@ra.msstate.edu (Bill Ford)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Re: Hacking USR ROMS [4.2 - 4.1]
Keywords: Supervisors.ROM.Hacks
Date: 7 Oct 92 17:21:15 GMT
Article-I.D.: Isis.wwf1.718478475
Organization: Mississippi State University


>seth@gradient.cis.upenn.edu (Seth Bromberger) writes:
>>This analogy does cause some problems, I admit.  For example, modifying 
>>software which is normally fully functional but is crippled for distribution
>>within the public domain is prohibited.  But it is *expressly* prohibited
>>by the authors of the software, and this, I think, is what makes the
>>modifications illegal.  Has USR expressly forbidden modification of the ROMs?
>>If not, I fail to see why users who wish to modify their ROMs in order to
>>gain an additional benefit are breaking any sort of law (the ethical issues
>>aside -- it may be "wrong", as Mr. Goyal suggests, but still legal).

This is an interesting ethical issue.  Two topics really exist:
1.) Is it wrong for 4.1 users to use their modem as a DS.

Issuing an AT command is not modifying the firmware.  AT commands are how you
control your modem.  Learning how to shift your car without your clutch does
not break intellectual copyright laws.  

2.) Is it wrong for 4.2 users to hack their ROMS.

It is not illegal to rip pages out of a book if you don't like the ending,
nor is it wrong to "trick out" your new car's engine by installing better
chips in the engine computer.  Legality aside, software issues like this
are kind of fuzzy.  Since you do not "own" the firmware of your modem (I
guess you don't), you may not be entitled to modify it in any way, like you
could your car engine.

Beats me, I don't have any answers, but I do have a Sportster (4.1), heh...

-- 
.---------------------------------------------------------------------------.
|  Bill Ford: wwf1@isis.msstate.edu |   Miss'ippi State University          | 
|        Or : wwf1@ra.msstate.edu   |      "Moo."                           |
`---------------------------------------------------------------------------'
From: dogbowl@dogbox.acme.gen.nz
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Re: Call display with Modems
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 92 12:10:45 +1300
Organization: The Dawghaus BBS, Palmerston North, New Zealand (+64 6 357 9245)

dave@hp1.holl.com (David Vrona) writes:

> In article <eFL3RB1w165w@surfcty.com> rlm@surfcty.com (Robert McMillin) write
> >
> >It can't be done with a 1200 bps modem for the simple reason that a 
> >normal modem will try to do all the normal handshaking up front. ...
> 
> You are DEAD WRONG.  It can be done.  I've seen the instructions for doing
> it.  I've seen a friend do it.

How about getting the friend to explain how he does it, and then posting
that info to the net?



dogbowl@dogbox.acme.gen.nz
The Dawghaus BBS, Palmerston North, New Zealand (+64 6 357 9245)


Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
From: tad@ssc.com (Tad Cook)
Subject: Re: The Zen of CID
Organization: very little
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1992 05:35:50 GMT

In article <1bi7fsINN8eh@iskut.ucs.ubc.ca> pdivine@unixg.ubc.ca (Patrick Devine) writes:
>In article <1bfs5lINN54n@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu> al045@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Gergely Tapolyai) writes:
>>
>>First:  How does a switching station makes sure that the CID that
>>is already on the line is _valid_.
>
>CID is conceptualy very easy.  Party 1 picks up his or her phone and
>decides to make a phone call to Party 2.  After the phone has been dialed,
>it connects to the main office (or switching network, or whatever).  The

The calling party is already connected to the Central Office.  This
is what gives you dialtone when you pick up the phone.  The ID on 
the line is similar to the ID for determining billing on toll calls.


>main office computer has a list of all of its subscribers/whatever.  The
>computer database figures out Party 1's phone number, and then patches the
>call through to Party 2, and places the data packet with the CID
>information on the end of the ring.  Party 2's CID machine interprets the
>information sent and can figure out who is calling beforehand.
>
>I'm assuming that the switching station where the call is being placed
>through does not interupt the ring signal already put into place at the
>head office, it just amplifies it so it doesn't degrade in quality.

The ringing signal is generated only by the end office that serves
the called party.  It is not generated by the originating office and
then "amplified" as it goes through the network.

>
>>Is it possible to make a little "black box" that will allow you to 
>>put any CID on your outgoing call and noone will ever discover it?
>
>masking you phone number is very plausible, and I'm sure there are box
>schematics out there to do it.  I'm sure you could even mask your phone
>number well enough that your phone company does not even know who is
>placing the call.  (free long distance calls?)

And how would this work?  What sort of signaling scheme would the
telco have in place so that you could prevent the switch you are
connected to from knowing which line is originating a phone call?

>

-- 
 Tad Cook     |  Phone:  206-527-4089  (home)     |   MCI Mail: 3288544   
 Seattle, WA  |  Packet: KT7H @ N7DUO.WA.USA.NA   |   3288544@mcimail.com 
              |  Internet: tad@ssc.com           or...sumax!ole!ssc!tad
From: pjm@msen.com (Peter Minuz)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Re: Supra hard to connect.
Date: 9 Oct 1992 12:53:56 GMT
Organization: MSEN, Inc. -- Ann Arbor, MI
NNTP-Posting-Host: heifetz.msen.com
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]

I've had the same problem using the Supra to connect to a Telebit at
high speed.  I was told the new ROM upgrade would take care of the problem
but it didn't...

Try limiting the connect speed to 9600 baud with ATS37=9 and ATN.
This will allow me to make a (slower) connection that doesn't disconnect.

Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
From: john@jwt.UUCP (John Temples)
Subject: Re: UUCP 'g' must die (was Re: USR DS v.32bis 10-15% faster thoughput over the Worldblazer)
Organization: Private system -- Orlando, FL
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 19:00:58 GMT

In article <fTKzq#e@quack.sac.ca.us> mrapple@quack.sac.ca.us (Nick Sayer) writes:
>Even if you use spoofing to get around modem-to-modem latency,
>there's still the latency between the modem and uucico...
>on EACH end of the connection. That latency shouldn't be
>pooh-poohed. I'm pretty sure it's eating 25% of my throughput.

I doubt it.  As an example, I get 1550 cps on ZMODEM downloads over
standard PEP, and 1400 cps with spoofed uucp g transfers.  The
difference is very close to the overhead of uucp, and nowhere near 25%.

>I've done my best. But my computer just can't do uucp-g at full
>speed. It tops out at 1.45 kcps or so. And it's a Sun 4/25. It
>doesn't do much else (certainly not during the measurement period).
>Is my computer inadequate? I don't think so.

Well, I and others in this newsgroup have no trouble doing over 2000
cps with spoofed uucp over their WorldBlazers on "mere" PCs, so I would
have to say something is inadequate in your computer -- maybe the
serial ports and/or serial drivers.
-- 
John W. Temples -- Preferred:  john@jwt.UUCP    (jwt!john@peora.sdc.ccur.com)
                -- Alternate:  john@jwt.oau.org
From: bruce@camb.com (Barton F. Bruce)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Re: ISDN->TA->Modem->Router->Ethernet:  A Better Way?
Date: 10 Oct 92 23:47:32 EDT
Organization: Cambridge Computer Associates, Inc.

In article <29347@twics.co.jp>, burress@twics.co.jp (Tim Burress) writes:
> 
>         We run a dialup communications service in Tokyo, and will soon be
> converting our lines to ISDN.  Unfortunately most of our members do not have
> ISDN, so they won't be able to connect to our system directly.  So the 
> conceptual plan is to have one 23B+D line come in, then run the B channels
> through terminal adapters, run the analog signal through modems, then take
> the serial output to a router where the sessions would be fed onto our Ethernet
> as telnet sessions.

Talk to Primary Access. They can take T1 lines in and staying digital
can 'be' modems at any of the popular speeds. They then can run all those
through an internal PAD and hand you an x.25 stream. 

You can get terminal servers from SEVERAL sources that take such an x.25 
connection and convert the individual sessions to LAT or TCP/IP ones 
on ethernet.

Primary Access actually can take up to 20 T1s in a single rack (480 modems 
worth). They understand various types of signaling on the T1s. They even
can sit on FG-B or FG-D trunks so 950-1ATT type access works into them.

Their DSP chips can do voice tricks as well as play modem, and they 
are well aware of what ISDN means to the modem market. What thay have in their
lab vs what they are currently selling you will have to discuss with them,
but realise that their hardware can sit on a T1 and can play old analog
games as well as newer ISDN ones.

Their pricing may well reflect the class customer they target. People who
casually terminate 20 T1 in each rack can probably afford it though...
I doubt anyone actually pays their list price.

FWIW, you get several x.25 connections out of a full rack - they DON"T put
480 sessions on just one x.25 port. I don't know exactly how many, though.
From: hughesk@helium.gas.uug.arizona.edu (Kirby W. Hughes)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Re: ZyXEL 16800bps?
Date: 9 Oct 92 20:38:26 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ

In article <1992Oct9.105313.12245@galileo.cc.rochester.edu> hm002b@uhura.cc.rochester.edu (hasit mehta) writes:
>In article <csjohn.718590512@knuth> csjohn@knuth.mtsu.edu (The Mad Hatter) writes:
>>I have a ZyXEL U1496E with version 5.02 EPROMs.  
>>I tried connecting to a USR Dual Standard with AT&N35, but 
>>could only get a 14400bps connection. 
>>Does anyone know how I can connect at 16800bps?
>>Thanks.
>>
>>-- 
>>John Wallace   ||   INTERNET: csjohn@knuth.mtsu.edu
>>  > > > Vote for freedom.  Vote Libertarian. < < <
>
>Yup call another ZyXEL 1496, I believe it has to be a fairly new one or has
>to be using a new version of the ROM., and you will connect at 16,800.
>An easy way to make sure modem will do this is to give the ZyXEL support BBS
>a ring. The 16.8k feature is ONLY availible when calling another ZyXEL.
>Hasit

Also, are you sure that your 1496E has 16.8 capability?  I just ordered mine,
and they said that 16.8 (and voice) is $50 extra!!!!


-Kirby Hughes
hughesk@gas.uug.arizona.edu
From: hansel@convex.com (Kevin Hansel)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Re: 'Serial of Champions' modem utility for Macintosh
Date: 13 Oct 92 19:35:33 GMT
Article-I.D.: convex.1992Oct13.193533.14645
Distribution: usa
Organization: CONVEX Computer Corporation, Richardson, Tx., USA
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by a user at CONVEX Computer
              Corp. The opinions expressed are those of the user and
              not necessarily those of CONVEX.

I just wrote: 
>
>Has anyone out there obtained 'Serial of Champions' yet?  I
>don't have (or know anyone who does) a Compuserve account
>and would *really* appreciate it if someone would send me
>a copy.  MacUser claims the utility is free, but they do
>say that it is available only on ZiffNet/Mac.
>
>Thanks in advance!
>
>Kevin Hansel

Nevermind!  I just found 'Serial of Champions' at sumex.
It is there for anonymous ftp.

Thanks anyway!

Kevin Hansel
Organization: Fifth yr. senior, Math/Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Date: Wed,  7 Oct 1992 15:55:47 -0400 
From: Eric Mitchell Snider <es1o+@andrew.cmu.edu>
Subject: What to buy?

I'm looking for a new modem for my Mac... I'm interested in a 9600 or
14400bps V.32, V.42 bis modem (I think). I want the modem to be at
least 9600 bps without compression. It seems like a lot of ads I've
seen claim high speeds but they're including compression. Fax send &
receive would be cool but aren't really necessary. Anyway, what should
I buy? What's cheap & good? 

Here are a couple prices I got from MacUser...

Mac Depot (800) 222-2808
Computer Peripherals: VIVA 9642e V.32/V.42BIS  for $359


Mac Products USA (800) 622-3475
Magic VFX V.32BIS FaxModem
14400bps modem. 14400bps class 2, Group 3 fax, V.42bis/V.32bis & MNP5,
software $289
 
Magic VX V.32BIS Modem
14400bps modem with compression to 57600 bps Hardware V.32bis/V.42bis
& MNP5 for $259


I'll summarize for the net if anybody asks. Or... just post your
responses.



Thanks,

Eric Snider
es1o@andrew.cmu.edu
 
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
From: lairdb@crash.cts.com (Laird P. Broadfield)
Subject: Re: Hacking USR ROMS [4.2 - 4.1]
Organization: "Well, a head on top, an arm on each side, two legs...."
Date: 13 Oct 92 05:02:19 GMT
Keywords: Supervisors.ROM.Hacks

In <Bvto06.wE@gator.rn.com> larry@gator.rn.com (Larry Snyder) writes:
>wwf1@ra.msstate.edu (Bill Ford) writes:

>>It is not illegal to rip pages out of a book if you don't like the ending,
>>nor is it wrong to "trick out" your new car's engine by installing better
>>chips in the engine computer.  Legality aside, software issues like this

>Is it wrong to modify your videocipher II TVRO descrambler to receive
>programming via satellite for which you don't subscibe to?  

>The programmers say it is illegal.  I say it is if for profit, but not
>for personal use.

Interestingly enough, this is a flawed analogy, since scrambled signals
transmitted across the airwaves are specifically protected by the ECPA.

-- 
Laird P. Broadfield     lairdb@crash.cts.com    ...{ucsd, nosc}!crash!lairdb
Hi!  I'm a shareware signature!  Send $5 if you use me, send $10 for manual!
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
From: alex@newcom.kiae.su (Aleksey Rudnev)
Subject: bug in ZyXel software (5.01). Modem freeze with 'V32 4800 MNP-5 on monitor
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1992 16:04:32 GMT
Organization: KIAE

We tested ZyXel 1496+ modems on UUCP/TCP-IP host in Moscow. It works fine,
in AUTO-BAUD mode of retraining. But we found 2 big problems:

1) It is xSU problem  only - we need -2 - -6Db instead of -9 on
Phone lines. But modem don't allow to change signal level in DialUp mode.

2) When I stand this modems on uucp modem pool (which work in the range
from V22-none to V32bis-V42bis modes), modems begin to freeze (1 time
at 2 days average) and the only way to reset it is 'Power Off'.
In most of this 'freeze' states modem write to LCD monitor:

 V32 4800 MNP-5

(And I think, that last connection was V22bis, not V32 connection).

Does somebody know about this problem?

(write Cc: to alex@kiae.su, please, CNews sometimes lost).


PS. It is the better modem for the telephone lines in xSU that we
saw, expect bad lines (for example, 2xx nombers in Moscow),
and 2-th after PEP modems on the bad lines for the V32xx connections.
From: Adam.Frix@p18.f20.n226.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Adam Frix)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: RE: USR Courier HST are getting flakey as they get older.
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 92 13:29:34 EST
Organization: FidoNet node 1:226/20.18 - cmhGate UF Gateway, Columbus OH

plauterbach@cortex.prospect.com (Peter C. Lauterbach) writes:

PCL> We have a bank of USR Courier HST modems that are a few years 
PCL> old. 
PCL> They don't seem to want to be able to talk the the latest 
PCL> generation of high speed modems like the Supra and PP 14400SX 
PCL> any faster than 9600. 

do you have Courier HST modems, or Courier Dual Standard modems?

If HST, then they shouldn't talk to any non-HST modems at anything over 2400.

This leads me to believe that you have some Courier Dual Standards.  You say
"a few years old."  This leads me to believe that you have original Dual
Standards, which (in addition to the proprietary HST modulation) only did
v.32.  Dual Standards before January 1991 or so didn't do v.32bis (14.4kbps).

So, if I interpret your situation correctly, you're using v.32 modems and
they're handling 9600 just fine with other v.32(bis) modems.

PCL> They also seem pretty tempermental in terms of holding onto 
PCL> the NVRAM settings, they just lose them every so often, and 
PCL> need to be reloaded. (Usually in the middle of the might !) 
PCL> 
PCL> I there a ROM upgrade for these babies, (sorry don't know 
PCL> the latest ROM rev ) or should we just check them ? 

sheesh.  This is simple.  Call 800-982-5151 or 708-982-5151, be at a terminal
near the modems where you can get their serial numbers and configuration
screens, and have a chat with USR tech support.  They're more than happy to
help.  Also, they're the only reliable source for this kind of information.

--Adam--
 
--  
Adam Frix via cmhGate - Net 226 fido<=>uucp gateway Col, OH
UUCP: ...!n8emr!bluemoon!cmhgate!20.18!Adam.Frix
INET: Adam.Frix@p18.f20.n226.z1.FIDONET.ORG
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems,comp.dcom.fax
From: matthews@lynx.dac.northeastern.edu (Matt Sullivan)
Subject: fax\modem problem
Organization: Northeastern University, Boston, MA. 02115, USA
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1992 16:11:31 GMT

I just bought a used FAX/2400 MODEM. I put it in the same expansion slot
that my other 2400 modem came out of, so I had hoped that it would just
start right off. This proved not to be the case. The FAX/MODEM seems not
to want to go back on-hook. As soon as I turn on the computer, the modem
picks up the line, making my phone line appear busy. I can make one call, and
after that I must disconnect the plug from the computer, and plug it
back in. So, my question is...Why is the modem not returning on-hook? Is
there any fix that can be made to have the modem drop the line? 

Either post or E-mail me please, it doesn't matter..

Thanks, 

-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-
Matt Sullivan  Northeastern University 1996     |
Matthews@Lynx.dac.northeastern.edu              |
MWS@maine.maine.edu   (Vacations Only)          |
_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-|
From: gtoal@pizzabox.demon.co.uk (Graham Toal)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: ZyXEL 16800bps?
Date: 12 Oct 92 20:28:11 GMT
Organization: Cuddlehogs Anonymous


In article <BvuqM6.14q@cs.psu.edu> fenner@postscript.cs.psu.edu writes:
>different from ZyXEL's.  USR's is based on their HST protocol, which gives
>you 16.8kbps in one direction and (I think) 450bps in the other.  ZyXEL's
>is based on v.32bis (and they are making the specs available to any modem
>maker), and gets you symmetrical 16.8kbps.

The significance of this, by the way, is that with tcp/ip you can
do an ftp in each direction at full speed.  I noticed myself doing
this the other day for the first time with both TX and RX lines on
solid and a reported throughput of about 1400cps on each transfer -
I was mightily impressed. 

G
From: ja2f+@andrew.cmu.edu (Jinmo Ahn)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Supra - STILL Problems
Date: 13 Oct 92 00:11:08 GMT
Organization: Senior, Math/Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA


I just installed the new ROMs on my Supra v32bis.   After testing the
modem with about 20 different BBS numbers, I found no significant
improvements.  The modem still has problems connecting at high speeds. 
Especially with USR DS modems - it either refuses to connect, or
connects at 9600.

Please let me know what your experiences are.

here are my settings:

ATI3I5
V1.200-H TR14-Jxxx-001 053

(c)1992 Supra Corporation

OK
AT&V
ACTIVE PROFILE:
B1 E1 L2 M1 N1 Q0 T V1 W1 X4 Y0 %C1 %E0 %G1 \N3 &C1 &D2 &K3 &Q5 &R0 &S0 &X0 &Y0
S00:000 S01:000 S02:043 S03:013 S04:010 S05:008 S06:002 S07:050 S08:002 S09:006
S10:014 S11:050 S12:050 S18:000 S23:063 S25:005 S26:001 S36:007 S37:011 S38:020
S40:087 S46:138 S48:007 S95:032 S109:008 S110:003 


jim+@cmu.edu
ja2f+@andrew.cmu.edu
jim@stealth.andrew.cmu.edu
Pick one... they all go to the same place. :-)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems,biz.comp.telebit
From: bryan@edgar.mn.org (Bryan Halvorson)
Subject: Re: USR DS v.32bis 10-15% faster thoughput over the Worldblazer
Organization: Electronics 101. Apple Valley, MN
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1992 08:35:12 GMT

In article <1992Oct9.075515.16900@netcom.com> gerg@netcom.com (Greg Andrews) writes:
>
>larry@gator.rn.com (Larry Snyder) writes:
>>gerg@netcom.com (Greg Andrews) writes:
>>
>>>I have no trouble with the idea that his USR can get 1800 cps transferring
>>>pre-compressed files with streaming protocols, or 1400-1500 cps on uucp-g
>>>with 64-byte packets.
>>
>>Well, why can't I get 1500 cps doing uucp-g into my WB modem?
>>
>
>Hard to say.  If it's an important enough issue to spout off every
>few days about it, why haven't you called tech support and talked
>with a technician?
>
I'm not as vocal as Larry about it but I'm seeing the same thing as he
is. When the system I get my news feed from had USR modems I was seeing
1550 cps. When he switched to T3000's thruput dropped to 1280 cps. At
the time I was using a USR modem as well. When I called to get the 5.01
roms for my Worldblazer I did ask tech support about the differences in
v32bis thruput. The tech checked that I was getting the correct connect
message and that I was running the modem at 38400 but that was it. He
told me that that was the first time that he'd heard of any complaints
like that and pretty much brushed it off.

I didn't make a big deal about it because I've only got one v32bis
connection that gets any amount of daily transfers. If I was using
v32bis more I would be making more noise about it with tech support.


-- 
Bryan Halvorson                bryan@edgar.mn.org
N0BUU                          bryan@n0buu.ampr.org
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
From: larry@gator.rn.com (Larry Snyder)
Subject: Re: Intel ->VFAST ?????
Organization: The Gator Conferencing System 219-289-3745 
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1992 20:21:35 GMT

eadie5295@iscsvax.uni.edu writes:

>  The Intel 400 has a DTE speed in excess of 115200 bps, whereas most other
>14.4k modems have a DTE of 57600.  (I think).  This might lead me to believe

The Telebit Worldblazers also support 115200 baud.

-- 
Larry Snyder                                    internet: larry@gator.rn.com
keeper of the Gator                                  uucp: uunet!gator!larry