HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: clemon@lemsys.UUCP (Craig Lemon VE3XCL)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Re:   Serial and Parallel interface ??????
Distribution: world
Date: 23 Jul 92 18:12:27 EDT
Organization: Private UUCP "Twig" Node

In article <1992Jul21.205557.29123@cc.ic.ac.uk> vulture@carrion.cc.ic.ac.uk (Thomas Sippel - Dau) writes:
>In article <clemon.08gc@lemsys.UUCP>, clemon@lemsys.UUCP (Craig Lemon VE3XCL) writes:
> -- In article <zgam_3l.wolfgang@netcom.com> wolfgang@netcom.com (Wolfgang Henke) writes:
>
> -- >The serial line is not the bottleneck. The telephone line limits the 
> -- ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> -- >throughput. 
> -- >
> -- 
> --         On some systems, particularly with multitasking OS's, it is.  Not
> -- everyone has the processors or UARTS for a couple 57600 bps ports and
> -- everything else that needs to be taken care of in the background.
>
>Ouch.
>
>Even mint condition 1981 PCs are able to transfer 250 kbit/s through a serial 
>line, bit serial, analog, via the floppy disk controller. So far I have only
>seen one machine incapable of maintining flow control and timing on floppy
>disk transfers, and that also only in very special conditions.

        Yes.  A SINGLE-TASKING 1981 PC.  If the machine in question (stock
68000 7.14 MHz Amiga) was single tasking it would be able to handle approx.
220kbps (about where the UART clock becomes the bottleneck).  FORTUNATELY
the Amiga isn't a single-tasking computer.  For the record, floppy access
on the Amiga is DMA and a custom chip handles all DMA transfers in the
background without using any processor time.  Maybe what we need is a DMA
serial port (novel idea....)

>It is just that serial (RS232) ports were perceived to be slow and in need of
>very careful processing. Thus the OSes start creaking, sort of like anything
>that tries to shovel tons of coal with an elaborate golden teaspoon.
>
>                                     Thomas

--
 Craig Lemon VE3XCL - Kitchener, Ontario. Amiga B2000  OS 2.04  UUCPv1.15D.
 +1 519 741 0297    +1 519 578 7817              | Silly people!  We all
 clemon@lemsys.UUCP clemon%lemsys@xenitec.on.ca  | know that the Universe
 IP/Packet: ve3xcl@ve3xcl.ampr.org [44.135.84.51]| revolves around UUNET!
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware
From: billmcc@seanews.akita.com (Bill McCormick)
Subject: Re: Help on upgrade to 16550A UART
Organization: SEANEWS - Seattle Public Access News & Mail
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1992 04:33:56 GMT

In article <1992Jul19.112553@mycro.UUCP> scott@mycro.UUCP (Scott C. Sadow) writes:
>   There is only 1 reason to replace a 8250/16450 with a 16550A -
>interrupt latency.

Bzzt.  Thank you for playing.

Interrupt latency is important -- and is the only important thing on
*single tasking* systems.

For multi-tasking systems, however, the goal is not only to not miss any
characters, it's also to allow other processes time to execute.

>   Should you replace you current UART with a 16550A? I would only do so
>if you are seeing problems like reduced throughput and/or high error rates.

Or if you want your entire system to perform better.

Bill
-- 
SEANEWS        [] Seattle News + Mail []         +1 206 937 9529
billmcc@seanews.akita.com                          Public Access

-------CUT HERE------  PGP Public Key -------CUT HERE------
begin 644 key.pub
MF;, :RX&*2U-8T-O<FUI8VLL(%=I;&QI86T@0BX@+2!B:6QL;6-C0&UI8W)O
M<V]F="YC;VW> P6K(=3;81O95TXWV"<CNQ+M)+:CI6F@1"G_]15^5MW&*U_>
M/TN?83RRF=O3*L0#N4B(ZU2 !/?F>,^J.LO%G*DA/Z\ '=!FL(5S7H2W;_T&
M$/;[OJV=/%6- WFVTR#(''.](%&>D+[#H)%X6^-*P\QHN$Q<DD >/'RJ"CH%
" !?[
 
end
-------CUT HERE------  PGP Public Key -------CUT HERE------
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
From: vjs@rhyolite.wpd.sgi.com (Vernon Schryver)
Subject: Re: Serial and Parallel interface ??????
Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc.  Mountain View, CA
Date: Sun, 26 Jul 1992 06:32:22 GMT

In article <clemon.08kw@lemsys.UUCP>, clemon@lemsys.UUCP (Craig Lemon VE3XCL) writes:
> 
>         OK.  Granted, serial links can be fast once you start shielding the
> path.  You can only go so fast on a serial line before the frequency of the
> bits reaches RF range and cable losses on a normal "twisted pair" become
> significant....


Urgh.  I just got through complaining at Craig Partridge for the
opposite kind of claim.

You do not need sheilding to get a lot faster than computer-to-modem
cables will ever be.

Consider the current "CDDI" draft standards, where data is moved over
"data grade" twisted pair at 100Mbits/sec.  That is about 3,333 times
faster than v.fast.  It is about 781 times faster than both of the
B-channels of a 2B+D ISDN connection running at once.  CDDI is good for
100 meters, which is about 26 times longer than classic RS-232, and
using far cheaper and unshielded wire than the currently common modem
cable.

I understand that CDDI is likely to be FCC certifiable, both A and B,
although only the commerical one is likely to be done at first.


Vernon Schryver,  vjs@sgi.com
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
From: prh@essence.demon.co.uk (Peter Humphrey)
Subject: Re: French/US V.32 modem compatibility?
Distribution: world
Organization: Distilled Essence of Life, The.
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1992 18:57:29 +0000


In article <JMR.92Jul22182555@predator.austin.ibm.com> jmr@predator.austin.ibm.com (Jim Rowan) writes:

> 
> I have a Telebit T2500 and would like to call a company in France with it.
> (from the US...)  They have V.32 modems.  However, I can't get the modems
> to connect.
> 

You may have to set your modem to blind dialling.  'Tis true that the phone
lines use different frequencies in different countries, so your modem may
not recognise that the call is progressing ok.  You don't say what the 
fault symptoms are.  

On the other hand, at all speeds 2400 bps and up, the modems' tones are the 
same the world over.  (I think  :)

Rgds

Peter Humphrey	|  prh@essence.demon.co.uk         | Voice 0932-343158
Woking, UK.	|  unionjack@cix.compulink.co.uk   | Data  0932-353948
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
From: keith@ksmith.uucp (Keith Smith)
Subject: Re: How do you increase uucico's timeout period for WorldBlazer modem?
Organization: Keith's Computer, Hope Mills, NC
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 92 22:55:57 GMT
Keywords: hdb uucico timeout worldblazer telebit

Couple other things here,

1.  Make sure S7 in the modem is BIG.  The default is like 40.  I
generally set & save this at like 90 (seconds).  It wouldn't hurt to
even go to 120.  If uucico times out it will drop DTR and hang up
anyway. 

2.  I didn't catch the OS.  Under SCO the dialer binary generates a
timeout based on the length of the phone number string.  The shortest
I've seen for a LD number is like 87 seconds.  Try connecting with 'cu'
and running the dial manually with an 'atdt...'.  Then time the connect
with a stopwatch.  Make sure your MODEM isn't timing out.

I have a GP dialer .c for WB/T2500 and SCO with no frills and long
timeouts, because I also have to dial thru a PBX direct extension access
from here, that takes quite a bit longer than normal to connect.  If it
might help I can mail you the binary or .c.  It has the added feature
that if the phone number has a 'Z' at the front it forces a PEP
connection, a 'U' forces UUCP spoofing on, and a 'V' forces a V.32(bis)
connection.  The letters can be stacked as:

ZU18005551212W1234W5678900  PEP + SPOOF

V18005551212W1234W5678900  V.32

That way I can set up an alternate Systems entry for 'cu' that keeps me
from going into stupid PEP mode for interactive use.

What other tricks have you folks done for this type of 'cu' operation?
-- 
Keith Smith          uunet!ksmith!keith            5719 Archer Rd.
Digital Designs      BBS 1-919-423-4216            Hope Mills, NC 28348-2201
Somewhere in the Styx of North Carolina ...
From: skrodzki@exet.ppc.sub.org (Stephan Skrodzki)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Re: Zyxel - which Buadrate?
Organization: EXET Hard & Software
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1992 12:54:38 MET
	<14142rINNa66@iraul1.ira.uka.de>
Reply-To: skrodzki@exet.ppc.sub.org

In <1992Jul20.152822.14355@rhrk.uni-kl.de>, Uwe Seimet writes:

>I'm working with V4.12c now and as far as I can tell there is no baud rate
>higher than 14400.

But out there (also in Germany) there's a beta releases 4.168 or so. We tested
it yesterday (of course You need two ZyXEL's). It supports 16800 an z-Modem
transmits packed data with 1930 cps!!!!

Cheerio!
-- 
  _____________________________________________________
 |    Stephan Skrodzki --> skrodzki@exet.ppc.sub.org   |
 |         Tiroler Str.12 - 7500 Karlsruhe 41          |
 |         Tel.: 0721/495236 Fax: 0721/401799          |
 |_____________________________________________________|
From: john.navas@uttsbbs.uucp (John Navas) 
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Speaker Death on Intel Sa
Date: 25 Jul 92 16:02:00 GMT
Distribution: world
Organization: The Transfer Station BBS, Danville, CA - 510-837-4610/837-5591
Reply-To: john.navas@uttsbbs.uucp (John Navas) 

 > Has anyone had any problems with the speaker on their SatisFAXtion
 > 400 (or 200 or 100...) - mine uncerimoniously died today (worked
 > fine this morning).  The only possible cause/effect I can guess at
 > is my upgrade to Windows3.1 immediately prior to speaker death, but
 > no changes via ATMx or ATLx make any difference.  The modem passes
 > all of its self-tests fine (except, of course for the "Do you hear
 > a dial tone now?" test :-).  Any hints, other experience greatly
 > appreciated!

The SatisFAXtion 400 is known to have a marginal speaker driver -- I
heard of one that literally went up in smoke.  You probably need a
warranty exchange.

Best regards,
John
                                                                                         
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
From: nazim@cwis.unomaha.edu (The Unknown)
Subject: For BOCA 14.4k Faxmodem users.
Organization: University of Nebraska at Omaha
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 1992 14:44:09 GMT


Hi folks,
I'm going to buy a BOCA 14.4k internal Faxmodem soon.
Could you please write me how you feel about your BOCA-Faxmodem?,
what experience did you make already?, is there anything I should be
aware of?, i.e. ROM's...

Thanks a lot in advance, please reply via e-mail...

Regards, Nazim.
From: peters@beltrix.guild.org (Peter Sleggs)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Re: Telebit vs. USRobotics
Keywords: telebit usrobotics modem
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 92 16:56:32 EDT
Organization: Bellatrix Systems Corp., Mississauga, ONT Canada

jonathan@netcom.com (Jonathan Ridder) writes:

> I have something to relate which may influence your modem buying decsion.
> 
> My company purchased several USRobotics World Port V.32 portable modems.
> I have been trying to get one to connect to Telebit T2500's and T3000's.
> The modems wouldn't negotiate MNP correctly and although I would get a
> carrier, I couldn't communicate across the modems.
> 
> I first contacted US Robotics to see if they had any suggestions.  I 
> waited on hold for a tech for about 35 minutes and finally hung up.
> Over the next few days I continued trying and was able to speak to 
> someone, but always had to call several times in order to get someone
> to call me back.  In the end, they were unable to get it working except
> at 2400 baud (they did confirm the problem.)
> 
> I next contacted Telebit.  My call was returned promptly and I was able
> to talk to a tech who had me dial in several times to him in order to 
> troubleshoot the problem.  We eventually were able to get it to connect
> at 9600 bps without MNP.  They have even called me back and are still
> trying to get my problem solved.

I have found that the T2500's that have V.42 work OK but the ones with
only MNP hang the link with US Robotics V.32bis


Version GF7.00-T2500SA

Does not work worth _____ 

Version GE7.03-T2500SA

Works just fine

There seems to be some interaction between the 2 modems that is 'fixed' 
with the 7.03 release, WHose problem I dont know BUT it appears on the 
V.32bis USR modems BUT not on the V.32 ones I've tested.

Sounds like a good reason to get a T2500 upgrade, if you can convince 
them of the problem



--
Bellatrix Systems Corp. Mississauga, Ontario Canada
peters@beltrix.guild.org or beltrix!peters
Xref: sparky comp.dcom.modems:11463 can.uucp:188
From: jfw@technix.mn.org (Jerry Wallace)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems,can.uucp
Subject: Re: UUCP 'g' vs. MNP & V.42
Date: 30 Jul 92 17:12:14 GMT
Organization: TechNIX, Inc.

Bruce Becker writes:

>Greg A. Woods writes:
>|
>|However, as Bruce Becker says, allowing compression on a Telebit
>|WorldBlazer or T-3000 may not be worthwhile if you transfer mostly
>|compressed data, because MNP cannot be completely disabled, and as a
>|result may end up being negotiated; and because the T-2500 cannot
>|spoof when doing V.42bis.
>
>
>	MNP can indeed be completely disabled in
>	at least the TB+, T2500, T3000.  What is
>	not possible is to disable MNP-5 & still
>	keep MNP-4.  V.42bis compression doesn't
>	seem to hurt anything when it is left on
>	all the time.

I have the ability to disable MNP5 separate from v.42bis in my T2500.  I
miss this feature in my WorldBlazer.

-- 
Jerry Wallace                    TechNIX, Inc.
Electronic: jfw@technix.mn.org   103 Healy Building
  Acoustic: Installing           2301 Como Avenue
 Ballistic: Hah!                 Saint Paul, MN  55108
From: nol2321@dsacg4.dsac.dla.mil (Jim Dunn)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Re: MODEM
Date: 27 Jul 92 14:00:26 GMT
Organization: /usr/lib/news/organization

In article <4029.106.uupcb@cutting.hou.tx.us> eric.vongonten@cutting.hou.tx.us (Eric Vongonten) writes:
>i have another problem.  people keep picking up the phone in the house
>when im on the modem. (i have a boca 14.4) It keeps disconnecting me
>from the boards and kills the download process.  how can i solve this
>problem (throught the modem).  If i cant solve it i guess i will have to
>post signs on teh phones.
>l8r,
>        -eric vongonten-

My brother had this same problem, so he bought some resistors and other
junk from "the shack" and built a "Protect-Your-Carrier" kits.  He told
me he was going to get them copyrighted and trademarked and... but I think
he got involved in another project.

However, I snarfed the only three that he ever made and use them in my
home.  They work GREAT!  I never have to worry about anyone picking up the
phones anymore.  If I'm on, they get a "dead" phone, when I drop carrier,
then they get a dialtone.  Real easy to install also, just unplug and plug.

THIS IS NOT AN ADVERTISEMENT!  JUST A COMMENT!  But you can e-mail him at
71461.353@compuserve.com.

:)
Jim
From: frank@cs.yorku.ca (Frank Pikelner)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: NETFAX 3.2
Date: 30 Jul 92 15:21:50 GMT
Article-I.D.: yetti.1374
Distribution: world
Organization: York University, Dept. of Computer Science

Hello,

I'm looking to purchase Zyxel V.32bis faxmodems to be used on our Sun machines.
I've just downloaded the netfax software from MIT vr3.2 . The software mentiones
a script called FAX2TIFF by Sam Lefbridge - anyone know where this can be had? Also I'd be interested in hearing from anyone using the software about what they 
think, problems, bugs, etc.

Thanks,

-- 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
 ---  ---    Frank Pikelner                                          /~\
 \    \  \   Technical Assistant, Department of Computer Science    <v.v>
  \-   \--   York University (Toronto, Canada)                      ,\^/;
   \    \    Internet: frank@cs.yorku.ca                            _{!}_
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: bob@MorningStar.Com
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Date: 17 Jul 92 22:16 MDT
Subject: Re: Why not PEP over cellular?
Nf-ID: #N:BOB.92Jul17141605@volitans.morni:-1007531751:001:988
Nf-From: MorningStar.Com!bob    Jul 17 22:16:00 1992


In article <clemon.08f0@lemsys.UUCP> clemon@lemsys.UUCP (Craig Lemon VE3XCL) writes:
   Generally it is accepted, however, that when trying to carry on a
   high-speed data connection via cellular, you will have the sense to
   stop driving :-).

Why would I want to restrict myself to not driving while my connection
is open?  After I conduct my interactive business and hit the road,
there may still be a long FTP transfer or source tree rdist or NNTP
update (often all the above, simultaneously) that don't require my
attention.  I can pitch my SPARCbook in the other seat, with its disk
and modem still grinding away, and forget about it.  After my notebook
and the office server are in sync and the traffic dies down, the PPP
link will idle out and hang up the cell call.  And shortly after that,
the SPARCbook will shut itself down to conserve its batteries (unless
I have it plugged into the car's power bus, which Mazda has cleverly
camouflaged as a cigarette lighter socket :-).
From: kevin.fong@uttsbbs.uucp (Kevin Fong) 
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: ZMODEM FILE TRANSFER TIME
Date: 26 Jul 92 02:20:00 GMT
Distribution: world
Organization: The Transfer Station BBS, Danville, CA - 510-837-4610/837-5591
Reply-To: kevin.fong@uttsbbs.uucp (Kevin Fong) 

bsmith@access.digex.com (Barry Smith) writes:

-> Is there a good program that calculates, from DOS, how long it takes
-> to transfer a file or set of files using ZMODEM at a given baud rate?
-> If not, does anyone have an equation or algorithm for calculating the
-> CPS rate of a typical ZMODEM transfer, thus applicable to file size
-> count?

Barry,

I'm not sure this will be exactly what you need, but you can calculate a
transfer time from almost ANY protocol if you know the percent
efficiency (thruput) of the protocol.  I have found from my experience,
that Zmodem is about 95 to 97% efficient on compressed files.  Thus,
assuming you are transferring at 9600 baud:

(filesize/(960*0.95)) / 60 would give you an approximate time in
minutes.  When you add data compression into the picture, it gets a lot
more complicated.  If this is too basic, then ignore me (as most people
do <grin>).  Otherwise, I hope this helped.

Kevin.
From: satan@buengf.bu.edu (Sean Unger)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Where can I find general information about modem communication?
Date: 30 Jul 92 06:27:01 GMT
Organization: College of Engineering, Boston University, Boston, MA, USA
Originator: satan@buengf.bu.edu

For a summer project, I am writing a paper on modem communications.  I need
to locate some documentation and/or standards specifications.  Where can I
find this?  Is there an FTP site or FAQ?  Some of the topics I am looking
for are:

1.  Parity - What's 1's and O's parity and what is mark and space parity?  How are they calculated?

2.  VT100/220 documentation

3.  File transfer protocols.  xmodem, ymodem, etc...


thanx,
sean
From: edhall@rand.org (Ed Hall)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Re:  Serial and Parallel interface ??????
Date: 21 Jul 92 22:52:07 GMT
Organization: RAND Corporation.

The problem isn't serial vs. parallel.  After all, from the CPU's
perspective, it gets eight bits at a time either way.  Whether
serial-to-parallel conversion occurs on the interface card or not
doesn't change the CPU timing requirements at all: without hardware
buffering, each character must be dealt with as it arrives.

The issue here is flow-control and buffering.  Interrupt-per-character
is simply a dumb way to do things.  Flow-control should be a hardware
function, and should be able to work fast enough to prevent
character lossage.  The "handshake" used by the PC printer port
allows for this, but this has nothing to do with it being a parallel
port.

Serial solutions to the problem already exist, in the form of "smart"
serial cards and (to a lesser extent) UARTs with small amounts of
buffering (like the 16550A).  Why blame modern OS's for problems
caused by antiquated interface cards?

		-Ed Hall
		edhall@rand.org
From: edhall@rand.org (Ed Hall)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Re: Boom! Our lawyers are tougher than your lawyers. You're Dead.
Date: 22 Jul 92 20:29:12 GMT
Organization: RAND Corporation.

In article <BrsyEw.Dst@wsrcc.com> wolfgang@wsrcc.com (Wolfgang S. Rupprecht) writes:
>Anyone relying on "<pause>+++<pause>" not occurring during a data transfer is
>not writing good defensive code.  Good programmers don't *hope* that a
>certain set of characters and delays never happens.  They turn off the
>inband +++ escape kludge and use a good *out-of-band* escape.

--If such is available.

In datacomm we deal with probabilities and not certainties.  Adding the
guard times makes in-band escapes a few orders of magnitude more
reliable.  Sure, a reliable--and reliably /available/--out-of-band
escape is to be prefered.  But given the state of systems today, with
almost-right serial ports and pretty-good serial drivers, in-band
escapes might be the best option for a "good programmer" to select.

Software which doesn't work on a particular system has /zero/ reliability.

		-Ed Hall
		edhall@rand.org
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
From: zxmgn01@mailserv.zdv.uni-tuebingen.de (Philipp Knirsch)
Subject: Re: Supra ROM Update?!?!
Organization: Comp. Center (ZDV) U of Tuebingen, FRG
Date: Sun, 26 Jul 1992 14:25:34 GMT

In <6oFioB1w165w@tsoft.sf-bay.org> bbs.ftiernan@tsoft.sf-bay.org (Frank Tiernan) writes:

>A while ago there was a lot of talk about Supra shipping a ROM update
>for their SupraFAXModem v.32bis on July, 14. I haven't heard anything 
>from Supra. And am wondering what happened (I did send in the
>registration). I have trouble connecting at highspeed Long Distance and
>am also wondering if the ROM update was supposed to fix this.

>--
>Frank Tiernan (bbs.ftiernan@tsoft.sf-bay.org)

I have called to the Supra Support BBS here in Germany some weeks ago,
and there was a message that the ROM-update will be delayed to the begin
of august.

Don`t know what will be fixed in this Update, but let`s hope the fallback
and fallforward now works correctly...

Read ya, Phil

--
  ~~~~~~~   "And even if you think you are at the bottom, something else
 (~ O O ~)   happens which makes everything even worse."
  |  >  |   Philipp Knirsch, Peter-Imhoffstr. 57 7402 K-furt, Germany
  \ \_/ /   email: knirsch@mailserv.zdv.uni-tuebingen.de
From: ianm@icsbelf.uucp (Ian Moran)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: 600cps at V32bis
Date: 29 Jul 92 08:57:25 GMT
Organization: ICS Computing Group Ltd, Belfast

Hello

My apologies if some of you have seen this before, I only now receive
this newsgroup.

We have a Miracom V32bis modem connected to the IBM RS6000 at 38.4 baud.
MNP is disabled, V42/V42bis is used, software flow control is disabled in
preferencs to CTS/RTS. We achieve error free 144000 connects to ukc.
Oh and DTE rate is locked. I would expect such a connection to yield
approx 1600cps. Using HDB UUCP as supplied with AIX I currently
achieve very poor response in the region 500-600cps, has anyone any idea
what the problem could be. Here is the config currently used.
UUCP is being used as supplied, ie the 'g' protocol and whatever
the default window and packet size is.
I am currently building Taylor-UUCP to allow me to alter these but
I don't think that is the main problem.

Any help greatly appreciated.

Miracom Courier V.32 NRAM Settings...

   DIAL=TONE   B0  F1  M1  X4
   SPEED=38400  PARITY=N  WORDLEN=8

   &A1  &B1  &H1  &I0  &K3  &M4
   &N0  &R2  &S0  &T5  &X0  &Y1  %R0

   S02=043  S03=013  S04=010  S05=008  S06=004
   S07=060  S08=004  S09=006  S10=007  S11=070
   S12=050  S13=000  S15=000  S19=000  S21=010
   S22=017  S23=019  S24=150  S26=001  S27=001
   S28=008  S29=020  S32=006  S33=000  S34=000
   S35=000  S36=000  S37=000  S38=000
-- 
  
           //    Ian Moran, ICS Computing Group Ltd, Belfast   
          //     ianm@icsbelf.uucp  or  ...!uknet!icsbelf!ianm  
        \X/            Fidonet: 2:440/59.5 & 2:257/10.1