HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 92 13:33:00 GMT
From: vixen!jadams@uunet.UU.NET (26070-adams)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Make Mine Extra Dry, Please, and Hold the Olive
Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 656, Message 9 of 10

In article <telecom12.641.6@eecs.nwu.edu>, coleman@twinsun.com (Mike
Coleman) writes:

> I was sitting in traffic behind a PacBell repair van and noticed two
> large weatherproof socket covers (the kind of thing you see on outdoor
> power receptacles) on the upper rear of the van.  One was labeled
> "DRY" and the other "WET".  I'm puzzled; anyone know what these are?

Not really sure of this instance, but I'll render an opinion (after
all, any clod can have the facts 8^)!  Wet and dry are slang for
whether or not a trunk has a battery and ground feed (Wet, or the line
contains "juice") versus a circuit without battery and ground feed
(Dry, sorry, no olives!)


Jack (John) Adams	    Bellcore RRC 4B-259
(908) 699-3447 {Voice}	    (908) 336-2871 {Facsimile}
jadams@vixen.bellcore.com   kahuna@attmail.com
From: edhall@rand.org (Ed Hall)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Re: 16550 vs. 16550AFN
Date: 24 Aug 92 03:29:52 GMT
Organization: RAND

In article <1992Aug22.060307.19838@qiclab.scn.rain.com> 70465.203@compuserve.com writes:
>berger@atropa (Mike Berger) writes:
=>It's not even something you should worry about.  The concern is that
=>the modem has to keep up with the maximum data throughput rate.  If
=>you use an external modem, then your computer's hardware (your serial
=>port) has to be able to handle the data rate.  When you use an
=>internal modem, you eliminate that potential bottleneck.  Who cares
=>what kind of uart is used on an internal modem (or indeed, that one
=>is used at all)?  If the modem can handle the maximum data rate,
=>then a different uart chip will make no difference at all.  A modem
=>doesn't have to emulate a 16550AFN to have buffering on board.
>
>Excuse me? The software that is fetching the bytes doesn't act
>*at all* differently if the modem is internal. The PC *still*
>has to go thru a UART to get the data from the modem! The
>bottelneck still exists.

The "bottleneck" is the requirement--with "simple UARTs"--that the
computer handle each character within a single character-time, or else
the next will be lost.  No exceptions.  If it takes more than this time
to perform a disk read, fetch data from extended memory, or whatever,
characters get lost.  This is true even though /on average/ there is
more than enough CPU to handle the characters at the full rate.

16550's ease this problem by buffering characters, so that an interruption
of several character-times can be tolerated.  In addition, since several
characters can be transfered on a single call to the serial interrupt
routine, greater efficiency can be had.

Internal modems can do the same thing, by buffering characters just like
a 16550.  Even though it might use (or emulate) a simple UART internally
to allow for easy software compatability, the modem doesn't need to pump
characters through it when a data overrun will occur, and can buffer
them for a while in its on-board processor.  Some modems do this (Boca,
for example).  Others don't.  (I'd like to know just which ones do, too.)

		-Ed Hall
		edhall@rand.org
From: wolfgang@netcom.com (Wolfgang Henke)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Re: Digicom Scout Plus with Mac help?
Date: 28 Aug 92 04:55:21 GMT
Organization: Netcom
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4

mrkeys@orac.holonet.net (Kevin Moore) writes:
: I hope that Macintosh software will eventually have modem settings
: and drivers that say "Digicom Scout Plus", but until that happens I need
: to know which modem settings and/or drivers I should choose.

In this respect I find the Scout+ surprisingly user friendly. I have 
tested it on a Mac with three different terminal programs and most often
just AT&F, the factory default register settings worked fine. This will
enable hardware flowcontrol, which also needs to be clicked on in the
Microphone II terminal program. The Mac-to-modem cable might be your
biggest problem, since not all of them support hardware handshake
correctly.

Some useful commands for you, which are not mentioned in the manual, but
some on the underside of the modem: ATI7. It prints out quite a few AT
commands, sort of like an online help facility. ATSQ and AT*O are 
mentioned in there, both of which I use often, the former to monitor
the line quality 6 times per second (7=highest, 0=lowest, ?=retrain),
the latter to read the connection parameters, receive level and current
register settings.


Disclaimer: I sell Digicom products.


-- 
   _________________________________________________________________________
   Wolfgang Henke        wolfgang@henke.sf-bay.org       wolfgang@netcom.com
From: wolfgang@netcom.com (Wolfgang Henke)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Re: What's a good 14400 modem??
Date: 29 Aug 92 03:59:46 GMT
Organization: Netcom
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4

jeffo@uiuc.edu (J.B. Nicholson-Owens) writes:
: In response to the question actually *asked in the subject line* (folks,  
: if you are gonna go off on a tangent, change the subject line  
: accordingly), I have had no problems with the Zoom v.32bis Faxmodem.  I  
: think it's the same as the Infotel v.32bis Faxmodem (but a little higher  
: priced) but since I have no direct experience with the Infotel, I won't  
: comment on it.

I have reports that the Zoom connects well with Multitech modems, even
the Multitech 14,400. I am not so sure about Zoom<->Telebit connections?
Any reports?


-- 
   _________________________________________________________________________
   Wolfgang Henke        wolfgang@henke.sf-bay.org       wolfgang@netcom.com
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
From: gottloeb@eel.dsd.trw.com (Jeffrey R. Gottloeb)
Subject: Re: Word of Advice
Organization: TRW, INC.
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 00:51:14 GMT

In article <BtKBps.440@mudos.ann-arbor.mi.us> mju@mudos.ann-arbor.mi.us (Marc Unangst) writes:

...

>People buying a modem just have to decide which they want more, a low
>price or good service and tech support.  If you want the service and
>support, then you buy from one of the well-known big companies out
>there, like Telebit, US Robotics, or Hayes.  If you want a low price,
>then there are five or six companies (Supra, Zyxel, Zoom, Practical
                                              ^^^^^
                                              ^^^^^
ZyXEL does not use the Rockwell chip set.  They use a custom chip set.


>Peripherals, Intel, etc.) out there repackaging the Rockwell V.32bis
>chipset and selling a modem.  You won't get great service or support,
>and your modem may break a bit more frequently or have cheaper parts
>in it, but you *will* get a low price.  Remember, folks: You get what
>you pay for.
>
>-- 
>Marc Unangst                | Real men don't make backups.  Real men never
>mju@mudos.ann-arbor.mi.us   | accidentally delete files that they're going
>                            | to need later.


Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
From: borgen@stud.cs.uit.no (Boerge Noest)
Subject: Zyxel - who, and where are they?
Organization: University of Tromsoe, Norway
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 19:01:38 GMT


Does anyone know the exact address of the makers of the Zyxel line of
modems? (Perhaps also the telephone number?)
-- 
|/// borgen@stud.cs.uit.no (Boerge Noest) | Amiga B2000			 \\\|
|//  Box 218, 9001 Tromsoe, Norway	  | Remember to :-) when needed	  \\|
|/   The worlds northermost university	  | Life is worth living.	   \|
	_Tilbyr News/email til hele Nord-Norge: Ta kontakt_
From: alansar@ccs.northeastern.edu (Mohammad Al-Ansari)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Re: Word of Advice
Date: 26 Aug 92 16:03:22 GMT
Organization: Comp. Sci. @ NU

In article <j-bn_c+.wolfgang@netcom.com> wolfgang@netcom.com (Wolfgang Henke) writes:
>MLPOWE01@ULKYVM.LOUISVILLE.EDU (Michael Powell) writes:
>: 
>:       University of Louisville
>: Phone: (502)588-6744
>: 
>: DO NOT BUY A SUPRA!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>: 
>: Resist the temptation and buy something worth your money...not a $350 (or
>: whatever the price) paper weight.  I've gone through three and number three
>: will probably go out this afternoon...none have worked.  Instead of seeing
>: some LD savings (over 2400 baud), I've paid lots more to send this damn thing
>: back and forth between here and Oregon....it isn't worth the stress.
>: 
>: Buy a nice USR or something (I hate to say that, seeing as the only contact
>: I've ever had with them was extremely poor....awful public relations).
>

Would you please elaborate on what you mean by "none have worked"?  I have
one of those Supra's and so far it works fine.  I'd like to hear about
the specific areas you're having problems with.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mohammad Al-Ansari, Ph.D. Student       | alansar@damon.ccs.northeastern.edu
College of Computer Science             | alansar@gnu.ai.mit.edu
Northeastern University                 | BITNET: alansar@NUHUB
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
From: mju@mudos.ann-arbor.mi.us (Marc Unangst)
Subject: Re: CLASS 1&2, T.4, T.etc CCITT @#$@#!!!
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 1992 12:49:52 GMT
Organization: The Programmer's Pit Stop, Ann Arbor MI

In article <1992Sep1.004211.9909@usenet.ins.cwru.edu> al045@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Gergely Tapolyai) writes:
>What I really do not understand is why is it that I have to pay 
>information that should be public knowledge?  Why do I have

Because selling standards documents, like charging its members fees,
is how CCITT and ANSI stay in business.  They are *not* part of the
government; in fact, the CCITT is an *international* standards
organization.

Since you seem to have such a good grasp of the value of a dollar, you
might want to tell the CCITT where they can get paper, ink, binding
equipment, and shipping for free, so they can produce their standards
documents at no charge.  "Public knowledge" does not equate with
"giving a lengthly standards document away for free to everyone who
asks for it."

-- 
Marc Unangst                | Real men don't use Windows.  Real men use X. 
mju@mudos.ann-arbor.mi.us   | Only a real man would use a GUI where the
                            | shift keys after "Alt" are "Super" and "Hyper."
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware
From: jp_torun@uuisis.isis.org (jp torunski)
Subject: Re: Ancient stuff... "gandalf 4800"
Organization: International Shared Information Service (Ottawa)
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 92 23:19:42 GMT

> 
> it calls itself "Gandalf LDM 414"
> 
> -- 
Is that a HUGE blue box, with 4 led's on the front?

                                JP
From: haga@zach.fit.edu (The Pyrotechnic)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Supra 14.4 to Supra 14.4 connections
Date: 2 Sep 92 04:33:05 GMT
Organization: Florida Institute of Technology, Melbourne USA


Has anyone had any problems getting SOME Supras to connect with theirs? I run
a supra with the 1.2xxc roms and have a few LD callers that can't connect
at 14.4. The strange thing is that I found one of the 'problem' callers was
able to connect at about 3am, but not any other times (IE - Peek hours) should
I start pointing fingers at the phone co?

Sean Haga
Admin - The Pyrotechnic's Pit BBS
From: djbpitt+@pitt.edu (David J Birnbaum)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Rockwell and ATT
Date: 29 Aug 92 21:46:57 GMT
Article-I.D.: blue.5290
Organization: University of Pittsburgh

This is yet another "what v.32bis modem should I buy?" posting, but with
a twist. I've been following this group for months and have seen good
and bad reports about most of the models. After sifting through it, I'm
most tempted by Supra and PPI.

Can anyone offer any suggestions about whether a Rockwell chipset modem
like the Supra is better (less buggy, more reliable, has more features,
etc.) than an ATT chipset modem like the PPI, or vise versa? The PPI is
more expensive, but I would happy pay extra if it meant a modem that
does what I want today and does it well. FWIW, I'll be buying an
external modem for a 486 running OS/2 and I'll want both modem and fax
services.

Thanks,

David

-- 
Professor David J. Birnbaum         djbpitt+@pitt.edu [Internet]
The Royal York Apartments, #802     djbpitt@pittvms   [Bitnet]
3955 Bigelow Boulevard              voice: 1-412-687-4653
Pittsburgh, PA  15123  USA          fax:   1-412-624-9714
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
From: scottb@netcom.com (L'etat des mortes)
Subject: Re: ConnectUSA
Date: Tue, 01 Sep 92 17:32:46 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Keywords: connectusa

In article <1992Aug28.000208.22604@b8.b8.ingr.com> brett@b8.b8.ingr.com (Brett Lawler) writes:
>Does anyone know any information about ConnectUSA? I heard it was similar
>to PC-Pursuit but has 9600 baud capability. If anyone has a phone number
>or address could you please email me.
>				Thanks,
>				      Brett
>
>
>-- 
>brett@b8.ingr.com

The number that I have is: 800 ATDT USA although I dont know much more
about it.

Anyone hooked up with this program care to post a small reivew of it?

scottb@netcom.com


Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
From: dmuntz@quip.eecs.umich.edu (Daniel A Muntz)
Subject: Re: Latency Question
Organization: University of Michigan EECS Dept., Ann Arbor
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 00:32:50 GMT

In article <1992Sep02.131155.9988@technix.mn.org> jfw@technix.mn.org (Jerry Wallace) writes:
>Beware, the latency tests are no longer accurate for the Telebit
>WorldBlazer.  There was a recent ROM upgrade to fix some published
>problems as well as a number of things we didn't know were broken.
>After this change, my WBs increased in performance slightly (to
>where I expected it to be) and the reliability increased markedly.
>I, for one, would like to see the latency tests re-run.

Latency hasn't changed at all between my WB's after upgrading to 5.01.
Ping settles to ~200ms (56 data bytes).

  -Dan
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems,comp.dcom.fax
From: vldias@inesc.pt (Victor Lopes Dias)
Subject: Help on Class 2 fax
Organization: INESC - Inst. Eng. Sistemas e Computadores, Lisboa - PORTUGAL
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1992 16:10:23 GMT

Can anyone tell me where i can find, and from whom can i get help on
Fax Service Class 2 commands and operations ?
I'm developing the software to send and receive faxes in a unix
environment, and the modem i have supports class 2 (TIA 592) commands.
The manual that came with the modem has an extremely SHORT list of
commands and it's parameters and is practically worthless...
I need details. The dealer, in Portugal, from whom i got the modem can't
help me, and i need to get more info on class 2 operations, FAST !...
I'd really apreciate some help on this 'cause it seems i'm stuck.
Thanks.

     vldias@inesc.inesc.pt   - INESC, PORTUGAL
From: edhall@rand.org (Ed Hall)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Re: Latency Question
Date: 4 Sep 92 20:19:44 GMT
Organization: RAND Corporation.

In article <BOB.92Sep4104913@volitans.MorningStar.Com> bob@MorningStar.Com (Bob Sutterfield) writes:
>I'd like to know what number telnetping would report over CSLIP or
>VJ-capable PPP between USR modems, but I don't have any here.  Would
>anyone care to try?

A USR D/S talking with a USR V.32bis (both large-footprint models) using
telnetping:

    min/average/max = 0.130/0.153/0.321
    min/average/max = 0.130/0.145/0.301
    min/average/max = 0.130/0.148/0.280

Same connection, using "ping -s ..."

    PING ives: 56 data bytes
    . . . .
    min/avg/max = 150/180/210
    ------
    PING ives: 8 data bytes
    . . . .
    min/avg/max = 120/142/180
    ------

This was run on a 486/33 running ESIX 4.0.3 using a beta streams PPP
driver for System V R4 (based on the freeware Sun driver) plus the SAS
async driver; it was talking to a SparcStation 2 running the freeware Sun
driver, pl6, on one of its internal serial ports.  Draft VJ header
compression was used, plus PPP protocol and address compression.

The phone connection was only about 12 miles, but was from PacBell
(818) into GTE (310) CO's, and is frequently noisy.  In fact, the
USR's had downshifted one direction to 12000bps.  (USR extended the
V.32bis standard to allow split-speed operation).

This link is in use several hours a day.

I usually run rlogin in a window instead of firing up a remote xterm.  I
generally don't notice any difference in latency between the two, but
starting a new xterm locally and then doing an rlogin is faster than
starting up an xterm remotely.  When I do run a remote xterm, the only
time I notice latency is when I'm making a selection with the mouse.  Even
then, it isn't hard to get used to.  XRN feels just a little sluggish,
especially when a popup comes up for the first time.  Even so, it is quite
servicable.  The only applications I avoid are image-display programs
and things like FrameMaker which do (near-)constant screen updates.
(I've fired up FrameMaker over the link to make last-minute edits, but
I couldn't imagine doing anything more than that--perhaps if/when ISDN
arrives...)

		-Ed Hall
		edhall@rand.org
From: kevinb@oblivion.csd.sgi.com (Kevin Brokaw)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Re: Help wanted on Supra <-> Supra connection
Date: 31 Aug 92 16:21:24 GMT
Organization: Silicon Graphics Computer Systems

In article <1992Aug29.121120.6883@spuddy.uucp>, spark@spuddy.uucp (Steve) writes:
|> 
|> But when I try to connect to a friends identical Supra, I have problems.
|> 
|> I'm dialling him, and he's answering with ATA when he gets RING.
|> 
|> His modem picks up, and it starts cycling through carriers.
|> 
|> We then get CONNECT 19200, and I get a whole load of garbage for 5 secs. Then
|> the garbage stops, and it disconnects, saying NO CARRIER.
|> At his end, he gets no garbage - just no carrier.
|> 

If I had to guess, I'd say one of you has an old ROM revision. I had the same symptoms
with a caller to my BBS when I installed my 1.200C rom Supra and he was calling with 
an older-ROM-level Zoom modem (essentially the same modems - minor cosmetic differences).
When he upgraded his ROM, the problem went away I also experienced a similar problem with
a caller owning an older Supra - they are in the process of upgrading their ROM level as 
well (they had an older one as well). Callers using recent-ROM-level Supra's have no
problems. Supra included an info sheet with my modem warning of potential problems 
connecting to older ROM modems using the same chipset, as a bug was identified in the
ROM microcode some time after initial ship.


-- 
Kevin Brokaw - Product Support Engineer   | 
Silicon Graphics Computer Systems         | All wight, rho sritched
Internet: kevinb@sgi.com                  | my kegcaps awounf?
                                          |
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems,comp.mail.uucp
From: cs000rdw@selway.umt.edu (Richard D Warner)
Subject: Followup on autoswitch posts for voice/data
Followup-To: poster
Organization: University of Montana
Date: Sat, 29 Aug 1992 15:10:47 GMT

	Here's a representative sample of the responses I received, concerning
a way to get our offices available for email full-time, without leasing 
dedicated lines.  There were a lot of responses that came from different 
perspectives.  The Distinctive Ringing service seemed to be quite popular,
but it's not available in Montana yet.  I've edited the responses down to
save bandwidth.  I hope that doesn't break any Internet protocol:-)  Thanks
for all the good information.

Rich

Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
From: bill@wrangler.WLK.COM (Bill Kennedy)
Subject: WB<->Intel cultural differences
Organization: W. L. Kennedy Jr. & Associates
Distribution: na
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 1992 01:14:10 GMT

I have been beating myself bloody with this one and maybe the collective
wisdom can confirm/explain what I have arrived at with brute force.  I
have a uucp neighbor equipped with at Trailblazer Plus and an Intel V.32bis
modem.  We communicate flawlessly with my WorldBlazers uucp and (I think)
cu.  About ten days ago we tried to bring up a serial IP link using the
Morning Star Technogies package.  I've never had any trouble with the MST
stuff using T-2500s, T-1600s, T-3000s, QBs, or WBs amongst each other on
the Sun SPARC or ISC UNIX (v1.3 TCP/IP please) platforms.

Each time that I would make a connection WB->Intel the login interview
would proceed successfully and as soon as the serial IP stuff took over we
would get massive retrains and then a disconnect.  On my end originating we
would get PPP started and I'd send the stuff to negotiate the link but the
Intel end was mute.  If I fell back to SL/IP (not in the same call :-) the
link would get declared up but the Intel was still mute.  Last weekend my
neighbor decided that he would try it with the Intel side initiating the call
but he saw the same problems with PPP that I did, but he was able to connect
and communicate with SL/IP.  You're probably asking yourself if I'm posting
to the right group, read on, please.

Sunday I decided to try the same connection to the Trailblazer but at V.22bis
2400bps.  It worked like a champ.  This evening I decided to try it PEP to
the Trailblazer and again it worked like a champ, modulo what PEP does to
serial IP connections.  Then for the sheer hell of it I decided to try the
Intel one more time but this time I stuck an S50=7S94=2 in the dialer to try
and avoid or omit the retrains that were coming every time.  Voila!  It worked
on the first and each subsequent attempt.  I had already concluded that this
was some kind of cultural problem between Telebit and Intel V.32bis (aren't
standards grand? :-) but this seems to confirm it.

Does this make sense to anyone?  Has anyone seen similar problems between the
WorldBlazer and an Intel V.32bis modem?  Is this a viable workaround if you
have?  I'm just as curious as to why serial IP aggravates it when uucp doesn't,
but that really _is_ for another group.  I'm guessing that the WB decides that
the link is so good that they should renegotiate within the modulation scheme
but the Intel doesn't follow and all the wheels come off rather quickly.  By
setting S50=7 (insist on 14,400bps) and S94=2 (don't renegotiate anything) I
have defeated what ever was defeating me.  Should I set S94=2 so that when I
answer a call from a non-Telebit the WB doesn't try to do something with the
other end that the other end can't do?  I should repeat that among Telebit
modems this doesn't happen at all, ever, since I've been watching.  All the
world is not a Telebit but life seems simpler when it is...
-- 
Bill Kennedy            bill@tyche.WLK.COM   |     Real friends don't let
                                             |     friends drive Novell