HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: earle@elroy.jpl.nasa.gov (Greg Earle - Gainfully Unemployed)
Subject: Binding Systems entries to specific Dialers entries (and not Devices)?
Followup-To: comp.mail.uucp
Keywords: Dialers  Devices  Systems  HDB
Organization: Gainfully unemployed
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 19:36:21 GMT

I'm using HoneyDanBer UUCP on a SunOS 4.1.2 system.  I'm sure I can't be the
first person to run up against this one:

I have several sites that are either UUCP neighbors or are "cu" hosts.  Some
of them have Telebit WorldBlazers at the other end, some of them have T2500's,
some have other modems, etc.

The common thing between them is that I like to run the local side at 38400
baud, no matter what the nature of the connection is.

The net result is that I end up with a lot of different Dialers entries, like

tb9600v42     =W-,    "" \dA\pA\pA\pTE1V1X11Q0S2=255S12=255S50=6S58=2S111=30S1\
80=2S181=1\r\c OK\r \EATDT\T\r\c CONNECT\s38400/LAPM/COMP/9600 STTY=crtscts

tb9600mnp     =W-,    "" \dA\pA\pA\pTE1V1X11Q0S2=255S12=255S50=6S58=2S111=30S1\
80=3S181=1\r\c OK\r \EATDT\T\r\c CONNECT\s38400/REL/COMP/9600 STTY=crtscts

tb14400mnp    =W-,    "" \dA\pA\pA\pTE1V1X11Q0S2=255S12=255S50=7S58=2S111=30S1\
80=3S181=1\r\c OK\r \EATDT\T\r\c CONNECT\s38400/REL/COMP/14400 STTY=crtscts

etc. etc. ... which results in Devices entries like

ACU cua0 - 38400 tb14400mnp \T
ACU cua0 - 38400 tb9600mnp \T
ACU cua0 - 38400 tb9600v42 \T
ACU cua0 - 38400 tb9600 \T

So, whenever I put "38400" into the "Class" field of the Systems file entry,
uucico always tries "tb14400mnp" first, then "tb9600mnp", etc.

But sometimes, I only want one tried.  For example, I talk to a T2500 via "cu",
and thus I only want it to use the "tb9600mnp" entry.  But if I "cu thathost"
I have to wait for the "tb14400mnp" entry to be tried, connection made, time
out and carrier dropped before the "correct" one is tried.

Is there some way to tie a Systems entry directly to the Dialer of choice,
rather than what is happening?  I haven't tried any other setup, because I
assume that the speed field has to say "38400" so uucico will know what to set
the line speed to.

What solutions have others come up with?  Or have you just punted, and set
X to X0 and S59 to 0 (if you've got a Telebit) so it won't return the extended
CONNECT codes, and hope for the best?

Thanks in advance,

--
	- Greg Earle
	  Sun Consultant, California Microwave, Inc.
	  earle@cminet.UUCP-neighbor.visicom.VisiCom.COM
From: bruce@blilly.UUCP (Bruce Lilly)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.uucp
Subject: Re: Any easy way to filter this type of UUCP traffic?
Date: 18 Nov 92 23:33:25 GMT
Reply-To: lilb@sony.compuserve.com
Organization: Bruce Lilly

In article <4003@ecicrl.ocunix.on.ca> clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis) wrote:
>In article <1992Nov14.001910.25570@blilly.UUCP> lilb@sony.compuserve.com writes:

[...]
>>perception of why the maps exist; to provide an accurate model
>>for UUCP network connectivity or to intentionally provide a
>>distorted view of the UUCP network.
>
>Not all links are bidirectional

For replies, bounce messages etc. to work properly *for mail
delivery via UUCP/rmail*, bidirectional links are required.
If the link isn't bidirectional, it is therefore unsuited for
mail delivery via UUCP and should not be in the maps at all.

>Except that now it'll take two people to delete it instead of one.

Grasping at straws, Chris?

-- 
	Bruce Lilly		blilly!bruce@Broadcast.Sony.COM
					...uunet!sonyusa!sonyd1!blilly!bruce
Newsgroups: comp.mail.uucp
From: zbig@wariat.org (Zbigniew J. Tyrlik)
Subject: Re: internet with smail3
Followup-To: comp.mail.uucp
Reply-To: zbig@wariat.org (Zbigniew J. Tyrlik)
Organization: Akademia Pana Kleksa, Public Access Uni* Site
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 16:18:35 GMT

As quoted from <Bxq57y.DH3@gator.rn.com> by larry@gator.rn.com (Larry Snyder):

+---------------
> piggy@noether.cc.utas.edu.au (La Monte Yarroll) writes:
> 
> >zbig@wariat.org (Zbigniew J. Tyrlik) writes:
> 
> >>Once your nameservers will advertise your presence on the net
> >>(And I hope you asked them to modify data for your domain from MX
> >>record to A record...), other machines will try to reach you
> >>directly; until nameservers will advertise it, no one will pay
> >>attention to your presence :-). 
> 
> what difference does it make if you are a MX or A record --
> since they are the same machine?
> 

Not always - I have 3 MX records for my machine, 2 of them are on
uucp-connected machines. If I will take SL/IP down, mail will
still be delivered...


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

_zjt
-- 
********************************************************************
Zbigniew J. Tyrlik       DoD# 0759   VF700C '84      zbig@wariat.org
IBM PC SIG Sysop - Cleveland Free-Net    aa609@cleveland.freenet.edu
APK	       Public Access UNI* Cleveland,          (216)-481-9436
Feeds, shell, FTP & telnet access        Uniboard distribution point 
********************************************************************
From: Christophe.Wolfhugel@grasp.insa-lyon.fr (Christophe Wolfhugel)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.uucp
Subject: Re: Are costs relevant ? (was Re: UUCP map entries)
Date: 17 Nov 1992 13:29:49 +0100
Organization: INSA Informatique (Grasp), Lyon, France
 <4001@ecicrl.ocunix.on.ca>
NNTP-Posting-Host: grasp1.univ-lyon1.fr

clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis) writes:

wolf> [ks.UUCP at IBM Austin]

cl> Try sending mail to the postmasters, my experience is that it often
cl> helps to unjam links, or at least to get the map entries fixed.

I did !   Still waiting for a reply... Just wondering if they read the
mail.  Other users from other sites also having trouble due to this map
entry also did... still waiting for an answer.

What is the next action to take ?  Shall the map coordinator for the
region be contacted to inform him of the trouble and eventually take
the entry out of the map, or is this out of his attributions ?

The more I send mail to .UUCP domain the more I see trouble, every day
new links who can't handle what they indicate for several reasons
(going from the mailer unable to handle UUCP to those who have
just misconfigured their local name).

My list of "dead {site}" is growing daily. The one published in the
maps not.

Well all this, also arrives to what you indicate in the Unix Email
software FAQ: use domains.

> On the other hand, I often find it more reliable to only run with
> local maps (eg: province or state), and select a well administered
> machine as smart-host.  I get virtually no bounces from mnie.

That is definitely the solution for sites, but when I see the top-level
domains aliases in the maps and more and more sites who have one
unique UUCP connection using them in without filtering anything, it's
just stupid.

The shortest way from an Internet host to my machine is following the MX
routing, but when just one node before a site has digested the maps
it generates a folkoric route...

> The *real* problem is SAs not keeping their maps up to date.

Nor (for lots of them) knowing how to use the maps in an efficient and
workable manner.

So what to do...  Would map coordinators like to give their opinions ?
What are the policies they use about entries with wrong or non working
links ?

-- 
Christophe Wolfhugel    |    Email: Christophe.Wolfhugel@grasp.insa-lyon.fr
  "Pour le bien-etre de tous, il est interdit de pisser dans le metro."
Newsgroups: comp.mail.uucp
From: martini@heaven7.in-berlin.de (Martin P. Ibert)
Subject: Re: Any easy way to filter this type of UUCP traffic?
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 1992 11:14:22 GMT
Organization: The Seventh Heaven, Berlin, Germany

bruce@blilly.UUCP (Bruce Lilly) writes:
> For replies, bounce messages etc. to work properly *for mail
> delivery via UUCP/rmail*, bidirectional links are required.

IMHO, that is not true. If the link a!b is used for UUCP mail delivery,
a bounce message might be sent to c!b!a!user. If the link a!b is not
bidirectional, i e b!a is 100*DEAD, than the mail agent at b will
not send the message directly to a, but rather via the normal mail
route to a, say d!a!user. Thus, the bounce message travelled c!b!d!a!user
as opposed to the c!b!a!user the sending mailer daemon anticipated, but
nonetheless it arrived at its destination.

There is only a problem if the mail link a!b is unidirectional and the
mail agent at b does not have any route to a at its disposal.

Comments, anyone?
-- 
___*___  Martin P. Ibert - Westendallee 100 d, D-1000 Berlin 19 - +4930-3056541
=======  E-mail to martini@{heaven7.{in-berlin.de|sub.org}|cloud9.in-berlin.de}
||| |||  ----------------------------------------------------------------------
||| |||  ------ Everybody wants to go to heaven, but nobody wants to die ------
Newsgroups: comp.mail.uucp
From: bruce@sonyd1.Broadcast.Sony.COM (Bruce Lilly)
Subject: Re: Any easy way to filter this type of UUCP traffic?
Organization: Bruce Lilly
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 92 17:38:29 GMT
Reply-To: lilb@sony.compuserve.com

In article <4003@ecicrl.ocunix.on.ca> clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis) wrote:
>
>And it also means that you can find it with pathalias -vv.

pathalias -vv only reports backlinks which are necessary for it
to assume are valid links in order to reach some destination.
Not all missing links (e.g. optigfx <- ucsd) are reported.

>Bruce is really complaining about [...]

Don't assume. 

>[...] systems that are reachable *ONLY*
>by implicit backlink.  Those sites *should* be hunted down and swatted.

Those are the ones reported by pathalias. Last time I ran it
here, it listed well over 1400 such links.

-- 
    Bruce Lilly, Product Manager,      | bruce@Broadcast.Sony.COM
    Routers, Peripherals & Still Store,| uunet!sonyusa!sonyd1!bruce
    Sony, 3 Paragon Drive, Montvale,   | lilb@sony.compuserve.com (slow)
    NJ 07645-1735  |  Telephone: +1 201 358 4161  |  FAX: +1 201 358 4089
Xref: sparky comp.mail.uucp:2096 comp.mail.sendmail:2833
From: kevin@cfctech.cfc.com (Kevin Darcy)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.uucp,comp.mail.sendmail
Subject: Re: email routing
Date: 17 Nov 92 03:37:49 GMT
Organization: Chrysler Financial Corp., Southfield, MI

In article <Bxq13z.7rp@gator.rn.com> larry@gator.rn.com (Larry Snyder) writes:
>I'm running smail3 release 28
>
>I want to forward all internet traffic that's in
>the DNS via smtp, local traffic via smtp and uux,
>and all uucp non-local traffic via smtp to uunet.uu.net
>to be routed. 
>
>I am having one heck of a time getting this set up.
>
>any ideas?

Let me get this straight -- you're live on the Internet, but you don't care to 
run pathalias yourself, so you'd rather just let Uunet handle the pathalias 
routing (I assume this is by mutual agreement)?

Okay. First, compile in the BIND router support, if you don't have it already.

Set up DNS for your local domain, and get the NIC to change their delegation
of "rn.com" to your nameservers (you might want to get Uunet to run 
secondaries for your domain, in case your whole IP link goes down). Leave out 
MX records for machines in your domain which can be delivered to directly via 
SMTP -- they only need their A records listed; add MX records for machines in 
your local domain, which need to go via a non-SMTP route, pointing to whatever 
SMTP machine is "closest" to them, transport-wise. Lastly, point your 
smarthost to uunet.uu.net, with a transport of "smtp".

So, your eventual routers file will look (abstractly) like

	BIND
	gethostbyaddr (if you want to handle domain literals)
	uuname
	smarthost (path "uunet.uu.net", transport "smtp")

Simple, huh? :-)

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
kevin@cfc.com 		  	  | Kevin Darcy, Unix Systems Administrator
...heifetz!cfctech!kevin 	  | Technical Services (CFC)
Voice: (313) 759-7140 		  | Chrysler Corporation
Fax:   (313) 758-8173 		  | 25999 Lawrence Ave, Center Line, MI 48015
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: comp.mail.uucp
From: leffler@vela.acs.oakland.edu (Bob Leffler)
Subject: Re: Are costs relevant ? (was Re: UUCP map entries)
Organization: Oakland University, Rochester MI.
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1992 11:04:34 GMT

clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis) writes:

>In article <leffler.722392624@vela> leffler@vela.acs.oakland.edu (Bob Leffler) writes:
>>clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis) writes:
>>
>>>In article <1eaojtINN6a9@grasp1.univ-lyon1.fr> Christophe.Wolfhugel@grasp.insa-lyon.fr (Christophe Wolfhugel) writes:
>>>>clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis) writes:

>>>>So what to do...  Would map coordinators like to give their opinions ?
>>>>What are the policies they use about entries with wrong or non working

>The real questions are:
>	- how should SAs report problem sites and links?  To the
>	  regional coordinator?  Rutgers?
Yes and either address should work.  If it's sent to rutgers, you may
want to use something like "problem in u.usa.mi.2" in the subject to
make Mel's life a little easier.

In Michigan, I get some mail directly for the SAs, particpate on a
mailing list of the more active SAs in the area, and post copies on all
my activities to the moderated newsgroup mi.map.   Since i"ve been
posting the individual updates to mi.map, I started getting mail about
errors in specific maps.  My only conclusion was that nobody took the
time to read the maps when posted, but they do read the individual
entries when posted to mi.map.

>	- Is the lack of entries in d.Top due to nobody reporting
>	  bad links, or that whoever's supposed to administer it
>	  has not got the time?
>	- Is d.Top *supposed* to be issued as often as necessary to
>	  "patch" the maps?

Mel is the appropriate person to answer these...
Newsgroups: comp.mail.uucp
From: leffler@vela.acs.oakland.edu (Bob Leffler)
Subject: Re: Are costs relevant ? (was Re: UUCP map entries)
Organization: Oakland University, Rochester MI.
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 1992 00:37:04 GMT

clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis) writes:

>In article <1eaojtINN6a9@grasp1.univ-lyon1.fr> Christophe.Wolfhugel@grasp.insa-lyon.fr (Christophe Wolfhugel) writes:
>>clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis) writes:

>>So what to do...  Would map coordinators like to give their opinions ?
>>What are the policies they use about entries with wrong or non working
>>links ?

>I think the policy is that they will fix them IF they have the time.

I can't speak for the other regional coordinators, but I won't post any
entries that have wrong or non-working links.  THe key here is that I'm
aware that they are wrong.  None of the coordinators have time to
pro-actively look for bad links.

Typically, the only way I know something is wrong is if my mail bounces.

bob

Newsgroups: comp.mail.uucp
From: "Chris Martin" <wk04331@psilink.com>
Subject: Re: Binding Systems entries to specific Dialers entries (and not Devices)?
Reply-To: chris.martin@amd.com
Organization: Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 01:50:39 GMT
X-Mailer: PSILink-DOS (3.3)

>DATE:   17 Nov 92 19:36:21 GMT
>FROM:   Greg Earle - Gainfully Unemployed <earle@elroy.jpl.nasa.gov>
>
>I'm using HoneyDanBer UUCP on a SunOS 4.1.2 system.  I'm sure I can't be the
>first person to run up against this one:
>
>I have several sites that are either UUCP neighbors or are "cu" hosts.  Some
>of them have Telebit WorldBlazers at the other end, some of them have T2500's,
>some have other modems, etc.
>
>The common thing between them is that I like to run the local side at 38400
>baud, no matter what the nature of the connection is.
>
>The net result is that I end up with a lot of different Dialers entries, like
>
>tb9600v42     =W-,    "" \dA\pA\pA\pTE1V1X11Q0S2=255S12=255S50=6S58=2S111=30S1\
>80=2S181=1\r\c OK\r \EATDT\T\r\c CONNECT\s38400/LAPM/COMP/9600 STTY=crtscts
>
>tb9600mnp     =W-,    "" \dA\pA\pA\pTE1V1X11Q0S2=255S12=255S50=6S58=2S111=30S1\
>80=3S181=1\r\c OK\r \EATDT\T\r\c CONNECT\s38400/REL/COMP/9600 STTY=crtscts
>
>tb14400mnp    =W-,    "" \dA\pA\pA\pTE1V1X11Q0S2=255S12=255S50=7S58=2S111=30S1\
>80=3S181=1\r\c OK\r \EATDT\T\r\c CONNECT\s38400/REL/COMP/14400 STTY=crtscts
>
>etc. etc. ... which results in Devices entries like
>
>ACU cua0 - 38400 tb14400mnp \T
>ACU cua0 - 38400 tb9600mnp \T
>ACU cua0 - 38400 tb9600v42 \T
>ACU cua0 - 38400 tb9600 \T
>
>So, whenever I put "38400" into the "Class" field of the Systems file entry,
>uucico always tries "tb14400mnp" first, then "tb9600mnp", etc.
>
>But sometimes, I only want one tried.  For example, I talk to a T2500 via "cu",
>and thus I only want it to use the "tb9600mnp" entry.  But if I "cu thathost"
>I have to wait for the "tb14400mnp" entry to be tried, connection made, time
>out and carrier dropped before the "correct" one is tried.
>
>Is there some way to tie a Systems entry directly to the Dialer of choice,
>rather than what is happening?  I haven't tried any other setup, because I
>assume that the speed field has to say "38400" so uucico will know what to set
>the line speed to.
>
>What solutions have others come up with?  Or have you just punted, and set
>X to X0 and S59 to 0 (if you've got a Telebit) so it won't return the extended
>CONNECT codes, and hope for the best?

[I would have edited the quote down but can't seem to get PSIlink's editor
 to do it for me]

I run 8 T2500 modems on SunOS4.1 to 60 neighbors and have locked the
DTE at 19200 and faked out uucico by using 19200 for PEP, 19200H for
2400, 19200S for 1200, and 19200V for v.32.  Works for me.

Really,
	chris@amd.com
	AMD postmaster

Xref: sparky comp.mail.uucp:2092 alt.internet.access.wanted:805
From: sulistio@sutro.SFSU.EDU (Sulistio Muljadi)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.uucp,alt.internet.access.wanted
Subject: Looking for UUCP hub (free/commerical)
Date: 18 Nov 92 04:45:34 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: San Francisco State University

I am looking for UUCP hub (e-mail and USENET) for the company I work
with.  If you have a list of UUCP provider (commercial or free),
please send it to me.  It would be great if you include the cost too.
The area is in Iowa City, Iowa, not in San Francisco, CA.
I am also looking for some docs on installing UUCP, esp. on SUN OS.
I know about UUCP in general, since I have my NeXT setup w/ UUCP already.
Thanks.
Please reply by e-mail.
-- 
Mul			    |  Alt. address: sulistio@sutro.sfsu.edu
sulistio@futon.sfsu.edu	    |		     sulistio@sfsuvax1.sfsu.edu
#include "std/disclaimer.h" | NeXTmail ->    sarong!sulistio@cs.sfsu.edu 
>Genius is one per cent inspiration and ninety-nine per cent perspiration.
From: duzan@thorin.cis.udel.edu (Gary D. Duzan)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.uucp
Subject: SMTP <--> UUCP <--> SMTP
Date: 16 Nov 92 12:24:41 GMT
Organization: Your Organization Could Be Here!


   I am looking for some help in configuring Smail (version 3, if I
remember correctly.) DSH has a local Internet with two major sites:
banyan, a Banyan Vines server with an SMTP <--> Vines Mail Gateway, and
dragon, a 386BSD system running Smail. dragon has access via UUCP to
UUPSI5, which sends mail out to the rest of the world. UUPSI5 forwards
mail destined for *.dsh.org to dragon, which sends it via SMTP to the
site resolved with DNS/Bind (generally, banyan.dsh.org.) I have UUPSI5
set up as the smarthost/uux destination and that seems to work fine for
outgoing mail. Incoming mail arrives as well, but the return addresses
are improperly formated. If I use uucp_zone_smtp, I get:

   dsh!udel.edu!duzan

and with inet_zone_smtp I get:

   udel.edu!duzan@dragon.dsh.org

when what I really want is:

   duzan@udel.edu

It goes completely nuts on Banyan names (User Name@Group@Org ->
User=Name%Group%Org@smtp-gateway.domain). My Banyan name is
"Gary=Duzan%CSS%DHSSDSH@banyan.dsh.org". But that name would generate
a return address like "banyan.dsh.org!DHSSDSH!CSS!Gary=Duzan@dragon.dsh.org"
or "dsh!banyan.dsh.org!DHSSDSH!CSS!Gary=Duzan", which isn't what I
want at all. Any ideas? Thanks.

                                   Gary D. Duzan
                                   Network Administrator
                                   Delaware State Hospital



-- 
                             duzan@cis.udel.edu
   _o_                       ------------------                         _o_
 [|o o|]       Virtual Reality? No thanks, I've already got one.      [|o o|]
  |_O_|       Disclaimer: I have no idea what I am talking about.      |_O_|
From: clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.uucp
Subject: Re: UUCP error - REMOTE HAS A LCK FILE FOR ME
Date: 23 Nov 92 01:42:03 GMT
Organization: Elegant Communications Inc., Ottawa, Canada

In article <1emqv1INN4t2@morrow.stanford.edu> ayub@krypton.Stanford.EDU (Ayub Butt) writes:

>I have installed UUCP on two SPARCstations at work. I have connected
>the machines via direct cable. I have verified the physical link by 
>using kermit. I get the login: prompt without any problem.

>When I invoke uucico [manually] to test the operation, I get the 
>error message "UUCP error - REMOTE HAS A LCK FILE FOR ME".

This means, when things are working normally, that your uucico managed
to dial into the other machine just as it was trying to call you.  A LCK
file is created for a specific site when uucico starts to try to call it.

If this situation persists, this means that uucico on the other end
died, and forgot to remove the lock (though some uucicos will kill
the lock if it's old enough), OR that there's a uucico process hung
trying to connect to you.

It's also possible that the remote site has permissions problems
with its lock directory or the directory is missing.  Which is
/usr/spool/locks or /usr/spool/uucp/locks or something like that.
(I don't have a SunOS system nearby to look)
-- 
Chris Lewis; clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca; Phone: Canada 613 832-0541
Psroff 3.0 info: psroff-request@ferret.ocunix.on.ca
Ferret list: ferret-request@ferret.ocunix.on.ca
From: gerg@netcom.com (Greg Andrews)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.uucp
Subject: Re: Binding Systems entries to specific Dialers entries (and not Devices)?
Keywords: Dialers  Devices  Systems  HDB
Date: 24 Nov 92 03:56:57 GMT
Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest)

clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis) writes:
>gerg@netcom.com (Greg Andrews) writes:
>>
>>BTW, It's somewhat dangerous to make your dialer look for such specific
>>connect messages from the modem.  What happens if the other guy turns off
>>compression in his modem?
>
>I tend to agree.  However, there are some times that you have to force things.
>I have my modem DTE-locked.  The normal ACU entry simply specifies the speed
>I have the DTE is set to, plus looks for "CONNECT" and ignores the detailed
>info.  But there are some modems that don't sync up properly when I let
>the two modems fight it out amongst themselves.  
>

Yes, the most common example would be forcing PEP with UUCP spoofing and
watching for the FAST/UUCP suffix.

>
>>You could comple the connection and log into
>>the computer, but your call fails because the script didn't get the /COMP
>>suffix from the modem.
>
>On the other hand, this may be what you want.  One of the very first
>user-experience postings about Telebits was from Henry Spencer who recommended
>that you will often want your modem to insist on a specific connect type.
>Ie: you're dialing into a modem pool, where some of them will sync up with
>high speed, and some of them are slow.  It's sometimes smarter to
>reject the slow connect and try again for a fast one.
>

Yes, but both of these situations are the exception rather than the
rule.  You're right that it's certainly not a perfect world where modems
are concerned.  You can't let the modem negotiate everything on it's own.

However, you're better off trying to apply the rule before you create
an exception, or you'll have Devices and Dialers overflowing with them.


-- 
Greg Andrews  --  gerg@netcom.com  --  ...!{claris,amdahl}!netcom!gerg

ObGuindon:  Roger Blunt has been saving newspapers most of his life.
            Later on, he figures to make some trees.