HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: tad@ssc.com (Tad Cook)
Subject: Re: Caller ID products?
Organization: very little
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 16:21:07 GMT

In article <C18s8F.1qI@wsrcc.com> wolfgang@wsrcc.com (Wolfgang S. Rupprecht) writes:
>davidsen@ariel.crd.GE.COM (william E Davidsen) writes: 
>[in reply to dialback modems -wsr]
>>  There's no absolute security, you just start at a locked room with
>>armed guards, isolated power supply, magnetic shielding, and retinal
>>print ID of users entering the room. Then you work down the scale until
>>you get to something cost effective for your application.
>
>If one is not interested in security then one wouldn't try to use a
>dial-back modem to that end.  If someone is using a dial-back modem that
>dials back on the same line then one is fooling themselves.  There
>isn't any added security over the case were one just adds another
>password to the login process.
>

I have mentioned it before, but here goes again....PROCTOR & ASSOCIATES
makes an adaptor for modems that will perform dialback, and do it on
a separate line if you wish.  It also has various programmable features
to thwart the normal problems that one can have with dialing back
on the same line.

It is the 46300F2 Secured System Access Line (SSAL).

You can reach them at:

Proctor & Associates
15050 NE 36 St.
Redmond, WA  98052-5378

Phone:  206-881-7000
FAX:    206-885-3282
internet: 3991080@mcimail.com




-- 
 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: loki.trickster@digund.uucp (Loki Trickster) 
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Re: Comment on Supra 14.4
Date: 27 Jan 93 17:24:00 GMT
Distribution: world
Organization: Digital Underground - PRIVATE
Reply-To: loki.trickster@digund.uucp (Loki Trickster) 

   >|> Buy it mail order; you've got a 30 day "Evaluation period" in which
   >|> Federal Law guarantees you the right to return for a full refund.
   >|> (Also, pay with a credit card, for added security)

JRG>There is no 30 day "Evaluation period" guaranteed by Federal law that I hav
   >ever heard of.  Can you substantiate this claim?

I do not have the USC citation, but there *IS* a federally-guaranteed
right to return any product purchased through the mails; I'm not sure of
the 30 days, but the provision is there.  Consumer Protection Act of
some year in the early Seventies.

Loki
---
 . QMPro 1.0 41-2003 . Have you crashed your Windows today?
                                                                                                               
Xref: sparky comp.dcom.modems:19759 biz.comp.telebit:1143
From: paul@eunet.co.at (Paul Gillingwater)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems,biz.comp.telebit
Subject: Anguish with T3000 settings
Date: 21 Jan 1993 07:50:27 +0100
Organization: EUnet EDV Dienstleistungs GmbH A-1010 Wien Austria
NNTP-Posting-Host: hp4at.eunet.co.at

i am getting a few critical comments for recommending the purchase of 5
T3000 modems because they're pigs to set up.  I had a similar experience
four years ago with Trailblazers.

The problem is very simple -- they refuse to connect to certain V22bis
modems, with or without MNP enabled.  It's a bit embarassing -- one of
my colleagues has spent nearly two days working on configs.  We're using
a fixed DTE speed, and I've successfully connected to high speed
services (v32 and v32bis) with both MNP and v42bis.  I had it working
with the 2400 modems that we call, but then my colleague decided to
AT&F0 and start again, to make sure it was repeatable -- and now we
can't get the T3000 to talk to *any* v22bis modem.  It just fails to
sync.  What could we be doing wrong?

Is there some PAQ that shows nice detailed lists of standard settings --
the ones in the manual don't seem to work for us.

Also, we're planning to use this with cc:Mail -- which i note has
support for Trailblazers. 

Thanks in advance!
-- 
Paul Gillingwater
Home system: paul@actrix.co.at (Waffle)
From: stella@gandalf.rutgers.edu (Ricky ...suave... Stella)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Re: modems overseas
Date: 21 Jan 93 17:46:11 GMT
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.

BOTGC@CUNYVM.BITNET writes:

>Would a US built modem work fine in Europe, without changing any settings?
>I know that some makes are not approved in some European countries, so I
>was wondering why. For example, I heard that the Zoom brand is not approved
>in Finland. I can't imagine why would that be.

There are some settings that would have to be changed, ie the tone-burst in
England is different than the US... It's just a matter of reading the
manual and setting up the appropriate registers...

-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Ricardo Stella                                 stella@gandalf.rutgers.edu
 RUCS-US Site Manager - IML-SERC                stella@remus.rutgers.edu
 Hill 118 - (908)932-2491        ...suave...    Rutgers University, NJ
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
From: oppedahl@panix.com (Carl Oppedahl)
Subject: Re: MNP-5 modems
Organization: PANIX Public Access Unix, NYC
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 17:42:32 GMT

In <9301271448.AA13762@shelter.usafa.af.mil> nace@SHELTER.USAFA.AF.MIL (Capt Bill Nace) writes:

>Does anyone have any comments on MNP-5 modems?  They supposedly have some
>error correction, compression protocols that will boost their speed to 4800
>baud (from a 2400 baud modem) when both the sending and receiving modems are
>MNP-5.  How likely is it that I will find BBSs with MNP-5 modems?

Better to have a modem that does not only MNP 4 and 5 but also V42 and V42bis.
V42bis can compress more than MNP5.  The place you are calling might
have MNP or might have V42, and you would want to be able to match 
the place you are calling.

Yes, data compression really works.  I have sent files using V42bis
where the time to send was only half what I would have expected from 
the byte count and the phone line data rate.  MNP5 would have been almost
as good.

-- 
Carl Oppedahl AA2KW  (intellectual property lawyer)
30 Rockefeller Plaza
New York, NY  10112-0228
voice 212-408-2578     fax 212-765-2519
From: fontaine@sri.ucl.ac.be (Alain Fontaine)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Re: Giving up on Supra
Date: 22 Jan 93 16:03:04 GMT
Followup-To: comp.dcom.modems
Organization: Universite Catholique de Louvain

Is there some sort of bimodal distribution in the quality of the SUPRA
V.32bis
modems ? I see people reporting the worst and the best. Among a population
a 4 modems, we have been unable to obtain a V.32bis connection even 
with local calls (they just drop a few seconds after connecting). They only
work when connected to the same PABX. BTW: 1 is C & 3 are H. Oh well... /AF
From: geoff@zswamp.UUCP (Geoffrey Welsh)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Re: Rom upgrade for Telebit Trailblazer Plus?
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 93 11:20:47 EST
Organization: Izot's Swamp

karl@ddsw1.mcs.com (Karl Denninger) writes:

> The point, which I poorly stated, was that one rarely finds V.42 used alone
> (the "alone" was missing above).
> 
> The reason should be obvious -- error control without compression is a lose,
> since you lose bandwidth for the error correction and control.

   Actually, LAP-M and MNP5 strip start and stop bits from the data stream 
(who needs 'em when you have CRCs?), giving up to 20% boost to throughput even 
after error correction overhead is taken into account.

> Many modems can be optioned for V.42 <without> the compression (V.42bis),
> but few people would choose to operate in that mode.  V.42bis has the
> feature of being able to "get out of the way" if the data is not
> compressible, so there is no reason to run without it if you have it
> available.  This is not necessarily true with MNP.

   That's very true.  I laud both USRobotics and ZyXEL for designing their 
modems so that V.42bis compression can be enabled while MNP5 compression 
remains disabled.  This is the ideal combination for sites that move mostly 
compressed files.  Sadly, many companies do not offer such capability.

  Geoffrey Welsh, 7 Strath Humber Court, Islington, Ontario, M9A 4C8 Canada
geoff@zswamp.uucp, [xenitec.on.ca|m2xenix.psg.com]!zswamp!geoff (416)258-8467
                Now I've lost everything, I give to you my soul
           And the meaning of all that I believed before escapes me
                  In this world of none, no thing, and no one
                            - Genesis, _Afterglow_
From: analog@sutro.SFSU.EDU (Anthony Yee)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: USR V.32bis to USR D/S
Date: 25 Jan 93 01:15:51 GMT
Organization: San Francisco State University

I have  USR v.32bis with the magical 4.1 roms. How do I get this modem to
become a USR D/S? I have seen the posting before but I had never saved it.
Please send me a reply via email. Thanks
From: chief@world.std.com (john j chirichiello)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Re: strange Zyxel modem problem
Date: 27 Jan 93 07:31:33 GMT
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA

wbe@bbn.com (Winston Edmond) writes:

>kline@cs.arizona.edu (Nick Kline) asks:
>   I have a next 68040 cube running OS 3.0 with a zyxel 1496E modem
>   running 5.02 Roms.
>...
>   One way to cause the problem is to log on at 9600 baud and cat a large
>   file.  After a while it seems to overrun the capabilities of the computer.

>   I am using all the default setting on the Zyxel, and have a proper 68040
>   modem cable that worked before with a 2400 baud modem.

>Maybe your computer could keep up at 2400 bps and can't keep up at 9600 bps +
>compression?

>The default flow control on many UNIX systems is XON/XOFF.  Check the serial
>port setup and see if "crtscts" (RTS/CTS) is enabled.  Alternatively, if
>you're logged in via the port, try "stty -a", look at the end of the second
>line, and see if it says "crtscts" or "-crtscts".
> -WBE


.Try using AT&C0 in your default setting.  I was having
the same problem when connected to the Internet.  Everytime
I (dir or ls) a really long Directory I would get disconnected.
JC
.
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
From: gspira@nyx.cs.du.edu (Greg Spira)
Subject: Re: QMODEM public domain?
Organization: University of Denver, Dept. of Math & Comp. Sci.
Distribution: usa
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 93 01:31:17 GMT

jongsma@esseye.si.com (Ken Jongsma) writes:

>In <1993Jan20.201103.27828@ico.isc.com> timhu@ico.isc.com (Timothy Hu) writes:

>>Is the Qmodem package a public or commercial package?

>Qmodem is most definitely a commercial package. Marketing is being handled
>by Mustang Software, Bakersfield, Ca.

>However. Mustang releases a "Test Drive" version (actually just one version
>behind the current version) as shareware.

It's a bit different than most shareware, though, because Mustang doesn't
place any legal requirement on individual, non commercial users, to
register the product.  To quote the documentation, "QMODEM Test-Drive is
licensed for individual personal use and evaluation for an unlimited time."
(this is from 4.52)  Mustang encourages you to register the product in order 
to receive the latest version and other benefits, but it does not require
you to do so.  That is presumably why some people think Qmodem is public d
domain - it's not, of course, but shareware on this level is rarely like
this.

None of this has anything to do with the Qmodem sold in stores, of course.

Greg 
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems,comp.sys.mac.comm,comp.sys.mac.apps
From: f0975893@jaguar.csc.wsu.edu
Subject: Re: SFM/Faxstf and Silent Answer
Organization: Washington State University
Date: 27 Jan 93 10:20:34 -0800

In article <1993Jan27.102305.22081@netcom.com>, jgro@netcom.com (Jeremy G) 
writes:
>>>> Silent Answer is also in the J (and I belive H) ROMs.  Unfortunately, it
>>>> does you no good unless you have fax software which was written to handle
>>>> it.  And FAXstf doesn't.
>>> 
>>> Does anyone know if, and when, the authors of FAXstf plan to integrate 
>>> Silent Answer into their software? It seems pretty pointless to me to 
>>> include the feature and then provide software that does not take advantage
>>> of it!!
>> 
>>I called STF Technologies about this before Christmas.  At that time, they
>>had tried to implement Silent Answer without success.  Apparently they did
>>everything Supra told them to do, but it wasn't working for them.  So,
>>it's probably only a matter of time until they and Supra figure out what's
>>wrong and get it working.  How long?  Who knows?
> 
> I talked to reps from STF at Macworld in San Francisco, and they said
> the problem with Silent Answer was bigger than just Supra.  The
> problem is that the Mac OS has no support for serial port arbitration.
> Once the fax software realized that the incoming call is data, they
> don't have a good way to pass the call to a telecom package.  They
> claim to be trying to get Apple to solve the problem. (Good luck :-( )

OK. So data/fax differentiation cannot be implemented using the Silent
Answer feature on a Mac. 

However, what I am really interested in for the moment is voice/fax 
differentiation using Silent Answer. Currently, FAXstf (for the Mac)
can only be set to answer NEVER or AFTER n RINGS. Do they plan to 
include the option SILENT ANSWER so that an answering machine (or
human) can first pick up the phone and then the fax modem will cut
in if it hears fax tones. This way the fax modem can be on my regular
telephone line in a transparent fashion. I do not have the need and 
cannot justify a dedicated fax line at home (a poor graduate student!),
so this would be ideal.

I will be in touch with FAXstf about this and will post any new information
I receive.

Richard
 |||||  Richard J Appleyard  f0975893@jaguar.csc.wsu.edu
 /o o\  Washington State University  
(   ) ) Voice (509) 335-7728  Fax (509) 335-9688 
 \_~_/  "To err is human, but to really screw things up takes a computer!"
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems,alt.security
From: vanzwol@bcstec.ca.boeing.com (Ted Van Zwol)
Subject: Re: Caller ID products?
Organization: Boeing
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 23:59:11 GMT

In article <1993Jan27.221556.757@ee.ubc.ca> johnt@ee.ubc.ca (John Jay G. Tanlimco) writes:
>Can you give an example on when you don't want others to know whose
>calling?  The way I see it, those that don't want to let others know
>who they are have something to hide.  

I disagree--as do many who have posted messages here along this thread.
I don't like it because it gives businesses additional information about
me that I don't feel they need to know.  As another poster mentioned, why
should I be forced to give you my name, address, income, etc...all things
that can be gathered and instantly cross-referenced anytime you call a
large business.  Sears has the capability to screen their calls.  When
you call, they can cross-reference your phone number with your address,
giving them enough general demographic data to estimate your income, etc.
and then put you in the queue accordingly.  People calling from poorer
neighborhoods are less like to generate as much money for the business
being called than calls from a ritzy neighborhood.

Granted, on a person to person basis, Caller-ID has many fine points.
I'm not saying I have anything to hide if I were to call you.  I doubt you
have the financing to warrant the assembly of a large database to cross
reference the world according to age, income, etc.  I'm not trying to be
deceptive.  I'm just trying to get the same treatment as if I were a walk-in
customer, not a phone-in.  

-tcvz

-- 
Ted C Van Zwol                           |    Genius does what it must,
uucp:      {...!}uunet!bcstec!vanzwol    |    Talent does what it can.
internet:  vanzwol@bcstec.ca.boeing.com  |                  -Emerson
                         ^^^^ new...
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
From: wolfgang@netcom.com (Wolfgang Henke)
Subject: Re: *** what's so good about zyxel modems? ***
Organization: Netcom
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL8]
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 03:34:13 GMT

Bill Fenner (fenner@postscript.cs.psu.edu) wrote:
: In article <1993Jan24.204102.13127@netcom.com> wolfgang@netcom.com (Wolfgang Henke) writes:
: |What makes this ROM based technology so expensive in the Comsphere? 

: Because it doesn't require any host support.  How am I supposed to load my
: SoftModem from my terminal?

This is a good point. I wonder how many people use terminals with a high
speed modem? In this case the Comsphere may certainly be a better choice
than the soft modem. There is no question in my mind that the Comsphere
is a solid modem as are Digicoms, Telebits, ZyXELs and many others.

I use an ADDS viewpoint terminal from time to time with my PDC.









-- 
   _________________________________________________________________________
   Wolfgang Henke     Data lanes not car pool lanes      wolfgang@netcom.com
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Re: Need info on Digicom Scout +
From: skriefal@eeyore.stcloud.msus.edu (Scott Kriefall)
Date: 21 Jan 93 16:04:43 -0600
Distribution: comp
Organization: St. Cloud State Univ., MN
Keywords: Digicom

> Only problem I've had is that it doesn't like PEP as the 
> first tone it sees and that it doesn't appear to connect to
> a Supra worth a damn.
 
This is strange - I have a Digicom Scout Plus, and have no trouble 
whatsoever connecting to the SuprFAX on one of the local boards.  I 
did have problems (for a while) with connecting to a USR Dual 
Standard, but that problem has been solved.
 
skriefal@eeyore.stcloud.msus.edu

Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
From: f0975893@bobcat.csc.wsu.edu
Subject: Re: Experiences with Supra products and technical support
Organization: Washington State University
Date: 24 Jan 93 21:44:58 -0800

In article <dgoldst.2b62c86c-e@peterpan.unm.edu>, dgoldst@peterpan.unm.edu (Dave Goldstein) writes:
> I have had no problems with my SFM since I bought it 2 months ago.
> I am using it to access a GatorLink box that both a SFM and Zoom v32 bis. modem in it. No problems so far, none of the heat problems, no lockups, I did get disconnected a couple of times, but I believe it is due to poor lines into UNM 
> rather than the modems themselves. Gator uses them a lot at their plant and had high raves for them. I would have gone with Microcom instead.
> 
I have also had no problems with my SFM V.32bis since I bought it 2 months ago 
(with the H-ROM).

I have the external model connected to a Mac SE/30. I have had no problems
connecting to data modems, other than having to specify a 2400baud connection.
The other modem gave up before the SFM had finished negotiating, so I had to
set the 2400baud speed and dial back. No problems connecting to the campus 
switch (V.32, 9600baud, local call) or the Supra BBS (V.32bis, V.42bis,
57600baud, long distance - like the speed!!!). I wish there were more V.32bis
modems around!

The fax side also works well. I have faxed locally, across state and
internationally without problem (both send and receive). The connection 
speed varies according to line quality and the machine at the other end. I 
have been pleasantly surprised how well the default settings have worked.
My only peeve is that the silent answer feature is not supported by the 
FAXstf software. This would be ideal for me since I can let the answer
machine handle the calls and let the SFM listen in and pick-up if necessary.
The answer machine will quit if another extension is picked up. This avoids
the need for an extra piece of hardware to direct the incoming call, or a
separate line. I look forward to its implementation...eventually.

I think this fax/modem is excellent for the individual user, though you
would not have thought it if you read the net. However I am a individual
user and do not run a BBS and leave the modem on continuously. In this
latter case, I would suggest investing in a more expensive workhorse modem
though I have no suggestions as to which!!

Richard.
 \\\\   Richard J Appleyard  f0975893@jaguar.csc.wsu.edu
 /o o\  Washington State University  
(   ) ) Voice (509) 335-7728  Fax (509) 335-9688 
 \_u_/  "To err is human, but to really screw things up takes a computer!"
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
From: oddbjorn@colargol.edb.tih.no (oddbjorn)
Subject: Information wanted on Zoom/TwinCom/Logicode/Supra
Organization: Colargol, Trondheim College of Engineering
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL8]
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 93 16:02:37 GMT

Hi.

I'm currently looking for a reasonably fast, cheap modem. 
The modem will mainly be used for uucp transfers under Linux.

Today I got an offer from Direct Micro - they have a range
of 14.4 V.32bis faxmodems from the vendors mentioned in the
subject line. They all cost $199 (internal) and $250-$300
(external).

Does anyone have information on these modems, internal vs. 
external, and/or more general modem buying advice ?

Any information is greatly appreciated.

I will summarize if there is interest.

/oddbjorn
From: davidsen@ariel.crd.GE.COM (william E Davidsen)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Why LAP-M?
Date: 25 Jan 93 22:18:20 GMT
Reply-To: davidsen@crd.ge.com (bill davidsen)
Organization: GE Corporate R&D Center, Schenectady NY


  I recently was checking speeds on some modems and combinations between
two systems, and called in at 2400. I timed sending a large text file, and
found that the thruput with serial lines locked at 9600 was 670+ cps. I
never particular thought about what the user of a modem with LAP-M or
MNP5 would get with high speed serial line, but it is certainly worth
does, and supporting.

  Now I see why callers to the public access system I'm running have
been reporting better thruput at 2400, I have the compression turned on
and they are compressing.

  With so much talk going on about V.42bis, I thought it would worth
mentioning that 2400 doesn't have to be really slow. I'm changing all my
cu scripts to 2400 system to use compression, and maybe the performance
will be better on some of them.
-- 
bill davidsen, GE Corp. R&D Center; Box 8; Schenectady NY 12345
	A terible poker player can have a great hand,
	A obnoxious fool can have a good idea.
	Both are winners, regardless of who has them.
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
From: ronal@telebit.com (Ronal Thompson)
Subject: Re: Problems connecting to a Telebit
Organization: Telebit Corporation; Sunnyvale, CA, USA
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 17:53:59 GMT

root@connect.com (Niles Mills) writes:

>Ditto.  Can only get a V.32 connection, not V.32bis, when connecting
>a Viva 14.4/FAX to a Telebit T3000.  Have tried every combination known
>to man (only a slight exaggeration). <g>

>Would be interested in hearing from someone who's successfully V.32bis'd
>a T3000.

>Regards,

>Niles Mills

>--
>Connect Software   | Voice   919/240-0132 | Internet  root@Connect.COM
>3213 Old Gate Road | FAX     919/240-0091 | UUCP      uunet!connect!root
>Morehead City, NC  | v.32bis 919/240-0192 | MCI Mail  220-5814
>28557-3167 USA     | BBS     919/240-0392 |

If you have access to the Telebit modem, could you post the results you get
from an AT&V command? This will list all of the register settings so we can
get an idea of what could possibly be the problem.


Ron
Oh yeah, it lists the rev of the firmware also in the 1st line.
If it's LA3.00, it's only v32, not bis.




ronal@telebit.com                These ain't no opinions but my own!
R.THOMPSON65  GEnie                                     
MJWG99A  Prodigy    and remember,  what you think of me is none of my business
From: garton@jeeves.ucsd.edu (Simon Garton)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: help with fast modem
Date: 25 Jan 93 01:59:24 GMT
Organization: University of California, San Diego

Hi : I'm about to move off this damn 2400 modem and jump up to
the 14400 speed. I've been looking at various options, and since
I'm going for a cheaper one (<$300) its looking like Zoom, Supra
or Boca. I was wondering if anyone out there in net land knows
anything about these modems. Should I go for internal or
external ? What about multitasking in windows ? Whats's all the
fuss about 16550 UART chips ? Does anyone know anything about
Twincom modems ?

Thanks for your help ! would much prefer email but will try and
read this group when I have time ..

Simon
sgarton@ucsd.edu