HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: rob@constellation.ecn.uoknor.edu (Robert K Shull)
Subject: Re: Supra problems & their BBS
Organization: Engineering Computer Network, University of Oklahoma, Norman, OK, USA
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 04:02:00 GMT

barrett@aminet.uucp (Keith Barrett) writes:


>I have NEVER been able to connect to the Supra BBS, and I was
>hoping to get answers to the following questions (perhaps someone
>can post the answers for us here?):

>1) Why can't people connect to the Supra BBS? What settings would give
>you the best chance of connecting?

I've never had trouble at the "standard" settings (14400 bps, compression and
error correction on), unless you count "busy". The cure for this seems to
be calling in at odd times. I've had good luck with Friday or Saturday
night, and Sunday morning (which probably just became bad times :-( ).

>	2. BUSY response is sooooo wrong it's not worth looking at. All of
>	   the BUSY problems have already been posted here by others.

So what IS the problem? It seems to say "busy" when the line's busy, and
doesn't when it isn't.

>	3. When the phone is never answered, the modem returns "NO CARRIER".
>	   It should return "NO ANSWER".

Is this true? I don't remember any of the modems I've worked with doing this.
I'm almost certain my old Practical Peripherals didn't, and I don't think
the Prometheus at work does either.

>	5. WHY CAN'T I CONNECT TO THE BBS?! You'd think they'd at least
>	   debug this before going public!

Like I said, my only trouble is getting a line. Are you having trouble with
other long distance connections? There seem to be some fairly rotten long
distance carriers out there.

Oh, for the record, 1.200c ROMs.
	Robert
-- 
Robert K. Shull, Sr. Applications Programmer, Engineering Computer Network
rob@uokmax.ecn.uoknor.edu
Disclaimer: OU can't afford opinions, so these must be mine.
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
From: dcarr@gandalf.ca (Dave Carr)
Subject: Re: Modems, compression, and SLIP or PPP (was Re: Using Telebit PEP with SLIP)
Organization: Gandalf Data Ltd.
Distribution: na
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1992 12:16:00 GMT

In <3632@randvax.rand.org> edhall@rand.org (Ed Hall) writes:

>In article <1992Jul23.125750.1022@gandalf.ca> dcarr@gandalf.ca (Dave Carr) writes:
>>You should turn off MNP4 and/or V.42 when running PPP.

>Why?  There is an obvious loss of throughput, since start and stop bits
>will no longer be stripped.  Granted, some modems might have lower
>latency in this configuration, but some don't.  And the loss of end-to-
>end flow-control can be a problem when the DTE datarate doesn't match
>the DCE datarate (likely with V.32bis since 14.4K serial interfaces
>might be a bit hard to arrange).

Oh, right.  MNP/4.  My mind doesn't even run asynchronously anymore :-)

There were some 500 people at the IETF-PPP working group meetings.  I
only attended the LAP/B and compression sessions.  You could probably
join the working groups by mailing the ietf-ppp-request@ucdavis.edu

-- 
Dave Carr               | dcarr@gandalf.ca       | It's what you learn, 
Principal Designer      | TEL (613) 723-6500     | after you know it all,
Gandalf Data Limited    | FAX (613) 226-1717     | that counts. 
Xref: sparky comp.dcom.modems:11468 can.uucp:190
From: geoff@zswamp.UUCP (Geoffrey Welsh)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems,can.uucp
Subject: Re: UUCP 'g' vs. MNP & V.42
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 92 21:36:37 EDT
Organization: Izot's Swamp

woods@eci386.uucp (Greg A. Woods) writes:

> Ah, but, as Sean Doran noted in private e-mail to me, "MNP-4 is a
> half-duplex protocol."

   I believe that he is incorrect, unless there's much more to that comment 
than you quote.  MNP4 is layered over one of MNP1 through MNP3, with only MNP1 
being a half duplex protocol.  I am led to believe that very few modems 
implement MNP1 anymore.  MNP2 is a windowed protocol (with a larger window 
than UUCP-g, thank God), and MNP3 is a windowed protocol which also strips 
start and stop bits.

   MNP2 will definitely give less than 100% throughput efficiency, even with 
ZMODEM.  MNP1 will do worse, especially over high latency links.

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
From: john@jwt.UUCP (John Temples)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Re: Telebit prices vs. Hayes prices
Date: 24 Jul 92 03:12:15 GMT
Organization: Private system -- Orlando, FL

In article <1992Jul22.222755.17594@fasttech.uucp> zeke@fasttech.uucp (Bohdan Tashchuk) writes:
>PC Magazine just made the QBlazer modem Editor's Choice.

I'm not sure that's a "good thing."
-- 
John W. Temples -- john@jwt.UUCP  (jwt!john@peora.sdc.ccur.com)
From: jonathan@netcom.com (Jonathan Ridder)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Telebit vs. USRobotics
Keywords: telebit usrobotics modem
Date: 22 Jul 92 07:40:57 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest)

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 can't really comment on the quality of the products - the problem I'm
having could be due to either (or both) modems.  Also, I've used other
US Robotics modems in the past and have had no problems with them.  How-
ever, I would have to say that the support that I've received from Tele-
bit has been exemplary  while support from US Robotics has been shameful.

-- 
 "I don't mind Tigger being in the Forest," Eeyore went on, "because it's    
 a large Forest, and there's plenty of room to bounce in it.  But I don't
 see why he should come into my little corner of it, and bounce there."
   A.A. Milne                                         jonathan@netcom.com
From: michael@resonex.com (Michael Bryan)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Re: Telebits and TIES (was: Re: Boom! Our lawyer are tougher...)
Date: 22 Jul 92 13:56:20 GMT
Organization: Resonex Inc., Sunnyvale CA

In article <Brp6vG.GtL@jwt.UUCP> john@jwt.UUCP (John Temples) writes:
>Note that the WorldBlazer uses TIES, while the T3000 doesn't.  Or
>[...]
>The way TIES is implemented on the WB is a bit unusual.  If you type
>+++ with appropriate guard time, you will get an OK prompt.  However,
>if you subsequently type any character which is not a valid AT command,
>the modem will issue the CONNECT string and go back online.  Is this a
>typical implementation of TIES?

This doesn't sound like TIES at all, since the WB still uses the guard
time.  (TIES will recognize the sequence regardless of the timing
involved, hence "Time Independent Escape Sequence".)

Rather, the WB method is an enhancement on top of the Hayes method.  It
will drop into command mode in all cases a Hayes modem would (theoretically),
but will "correct" itself if it sees that the following data is not
a valid command, thereby decreasing the likelihood of file transfer
aborts due to bad luck on the timing.

Of course, if the WB sends back a "CONNECT" message as part of this,
it would screw up any file transfer in progress anyway.  I guess if
you disabled messages altogether it might work ok...

-- 
Michael Bryan        michael@resonex.com                     |     ,_,
"Pretenders I meet are making a trail along the way.         |    /oo \
They say that they know how to show me a path to guide my    |    <>__|
way to truth..." --- David York, "The Quiet of a Candle"     |    |  U|
From: joe@retina.anatomy.upenn.edu (No Exit)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: SLIP and UNIX
Keywords: v.32bis,v.42,v.42bis, UNIX,SLIP
Date: 27 Jul 92 15:53:11 GMT
Organization: University of Pennsylvania


Hi,

   I would like to use a v.32bis,v.42, v.42bis modem under *UNIX*, either LINUX or ISC 
386/ix v. 2.2-- the goal is to run X windows over the modem through SLIP. Any help with
this problem would be much appreciated. Thanks.

-- 

			Joe Panico
			joe@retina.anatomy.upenn.edu
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware
From: jbhuber@iastate.edu (Joseph B Huber)
Subject: Re: 14,400 bps:  Does any comm software support it?
Organization: Iowa State University, Ames, IA
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1992 18:25:06 GMT

In article <1992Jul24.091049.109291@zeus.calpoly.edu>
mwormley@zeus.calpoly.edu (Matt Wormley) writes:
>In article <1992Jul23.184645.19992@actrix.gen.nz>
>Steve.Withers@bbs.actrix.gen.nz writes:
>>You should set it to 57,600 if you have a 14.4-capable modem with V.42bis.
>>
>
>   Not necessarily.  It depends on the modem.  My Dual Standard (and many of
>the v.32bis-supporting modems) will only allow a 38.4kbps comm port rate.
>Your modem should say.


I was just going to make the same point myself! In fact, in the last review of
v.32bis/v.42bis modems in _PC Magazine_ (several months ago), only a couple of
the modems reviewed (and a large nubmer were reviewed) supported a com port
rate greater than 38.4 kbps. 

Perhaps things have changed by now, but this is something to keep in mind when
shopping for a modem. Make sure the modem com port can support 57.6 kbps!!

-- 
Joe Huber 
(jbhuber@iastate.edu)        | Capt. James T. Kirk on the 2nd law of thermo: 
Dept. of Mech. Egr.          |  "It's not a hundred percent efficient,
Iowa State University        |   but nothing ever is."
From: Alan.Gilbertson@f230.n3603.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Alan Gilbertson)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Re: Boom! You're Dead.
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 92 09:25:51 EDT
Organization: FidoNet node 1:3603/230 - CSFSO Telecomm, Clearwater FL

On <Jul 24 18:24>, Robert Mathias writes:

 RM> It's popular to blame the press for everything, but in this case 
 RM> it is not so.

I haven't seen the notion that Hayes was being taken to the cleaners
being touted on the BBS circuits, although that may be the case.

 RM> markets because they provided the best product earliest.  USR 
 RM> got into the 9600 and above market at a price that was 
 RM> affordable for PC BBS's.  They aggressively pursued this 
 RM> market and even to this day most PC BBS's (with high speed 
 RM> modems) use USR.

In fact, USR's "sysop deals" got them well entrenched in the BBS
community before the HST came out.  Reasoning (with some justification)
that users would follow what sysops were using, they pushed the HST 
heavily. Whether USR actually considers this a primary market, I don't
know.  According to what I'm seeing in various BBS conferences, they
have not been treating sysops with kindness in the last year or so.

 RM> It is very easy to see how a BBS user would see "that Hayes is 
 RM> being beat up by USR...".  After all, in their world they see 
 RM> USR, not Hayes.  The same is true for the UUCP market where 
 RM> Telebit dominates.  

This is quite true, although both PPI (Hayes subsidiary) and Hayes modems 
are showing up more and more in the BBS community.  On the other side of
the coin, USR's name is becoming better known in "serious" telecom 
circles, and is mentioned with interest rather than the casual disregard
that was common as little as three or four years ago.

--  
Internet: Alan.Gilbertson@f230.n3603.z1.FIDONET.ORG
UUCP: ...!myrddin!tct!psycho!230!Alan.Gilbertson
Note:psycho is a free gateway between Usenet & Fidonet. For info write to
     root@psycho.fidonet.org.
From: joachim@jr.rhein-main.de (Joachim Riedel)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Re: How do you increase uucico's timeout period for WorldBlazer modem?
Date: 21 Jul 92 17:10:51 GMT
Organization: The European Coherent Support BBS

rbt@tous.oau.org (Robert B. Tate) writes:
> ### PEP, uucp spoofing, no compression (for calling WB w/PEP tones last)
> wbpepS	=W-,	"" AATZ OK ATx1v1q0e1s59=15s0=0s7=80s50=255s94=2s111=30s180=0s181=1s190=0DTW\T\r\d\d\d\d\d\d\d\d\d\d\c CONNECT\sFAST "" UUCP


I got a hint from a friend. Now I use just    FAST-\c-FAST in the Dialers-File.
Works fine.

Cheers,

Joachim

PS: Taylor-UUCP offers better configuration ;-))   chat-timeout for example.

+----------------------------+--------------------+-------------------------+
| Joachim Riedel             | joachim@jr.sub.org | jr@connie.de.convex.com |
| Geschwister-Scholl-Str. 48 +----------------------------------------------|
| D-6050 Offenbach am Main   | European Coherent Support BBS: +49 69 858711 |
| Tel. +49 69 85 62 25       | V22bis, V32, V32bis (T3000 and USR Dual Std. |
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+
 
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
From: nthirion@rkw-risc.cs.up.ac.za (Nico Thirion)
Subject: QUESTION: Modem comms using TPascal
Summary: Using pascal for modem comms
Date: 29 Jul 92 15:51:46 GMT
Organization: University of Pretoria, South Africa
Keywords: pascal, modem, comms

Need info on modem communication using Turbo Pascal (Source also) - Any hints 
tips or units.
Thank You.
Nicolaus.
From: kevin.fong@uttsbbs.uucp (Kevin Fong) 
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: PRACT PERIPH 14400FXSA
Date: 30 Jul 92 00:58:00 GMT
Distribution: world
Organization: The Transfer Station BBS, Danville, CA - 510-837-4610/837-5591
Reply-To: kevin.fong@uttsbbs.uucp (Kevin Fong) 

-> V.42(bis?) / MNP.  He also hinted that 1.14g had some other problems,
-> and that it would be best for anyone wanting an upgrade to wait for
-> the official release of the new EPROMS if the idea of being a beta
-> tester was unappealing to them.

There _is_ a known bug in the beta 1.14g release.  It has to do
something with the &D3 command (reset modem to init state).  Most BBS
sysops won't notice this, since they do not use the &D3.  In my case,
the beta eprom has solved my V.42 (loss of error correction) problem.

-> Again, PPI is now aware of the RTS/CTS test bug; Eugene duplicated it
-> on his machine.

I should hope so!  Their _own_ BBS suffered the same problem as everyone
else!

Kevin (kevin.fong%uttsbbs%boo@pacbell.com)
                           
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
From: bbs.ftiernan@tsoft.sf-bay.org (Frank Tiernan)
Subject: Supra ROM Update?!?!
Organization: The TSoft BBS and Public Access Unix, +1 415 969 8238
Date: Sun, 26 Jul 1992 08:20:40 GMT

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)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
From: andrew@cubetech.com (Andrew Loewenstern)
Subject: Re: V.fast modems available?
Keywords: v32 zyxel uucp
Organization: Cube Technologies, Inc.
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 12:12:01 GMT

In article <FuR9NB3w164w@zswamp.UUCP> geoff@zswamp.UUCP (Geoffrey Welsh) writes:
>shah@cs.arizona.edu (Rawn Shah) writes:
>
>>     Does anyone know if any V.fast modems are commercially available yet?
>> I've heard of something called CODEX but thats all.
>
>   Since V.fast hasn't yet been written (it's called "V.fast" because it 
>hasn't yet been assigned a number, like V.32), I would not count on anyone 
>selling genuine V.fast modems.

I think the CCITT will choose V.34...

andrew
-- 
andrew@cubetech.com
Andrew Loewenstern      | "If I am not for myself, who will be for me?
Cube Technologies, Inc. |  If I am only for myself, who am I?" -Hillel
From: wolfgang@netcom.com (Wolfgang Henke)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Re: Connecting Supra to Supra
Date: 21 Jul 92 20:31:19 GMT
Organization: Netcom
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4

zxmgn01@mailserv.zdv.uni-tuebingen.de (Philipp Knirsch) writes:
: Thats one of the common things all USR users say, but i have now seen a lot
: of USR users around, and the big prblem with the USR is that you CAN`T
: actually say what speed you are driving. This is not so with those new modems
: like the Supra where your speed is shown on the display.
: 
: And when you call e.g. to the USA from germany, i usually get better cps with
: my supra than my friend with his HST. His ARQ (or was it ASL?!) light flickered
: and did`t stop, and often he got just about 200-300cps, and that never ever
: happend to me with my supra. It can be that my supra drops down to 4800 (
: often with some help of me sothat it doesn`t drop carrier, but thats probably
: a software problem which is to be solved in one ROM update that follows),
: and with this i got about 500-600 cps using V.42bis.

Phil, the #1 Supra proponent on comp.dcom.modems.... :-)

Yes, the LCD indicator can be useful on the Supra. On USRs it would be a bit
more indirect through the transfer rate, but maybe USR is thinking about
adding more? On the Scout+ its the AT*O command, were you can read the
connect speed while you are connected. 

The 4800 bps on the transatlantic connections maybe more than a software 
problem, if indeed it is a software problem. More likely its indicating the 
modems real top performance for the particular connection concerned. V.32 at 
4800 bps fallback requires much less signal-to-noise than other protocols, so 
its only natural to use this over others. (I use it mainly for connections 
into known difficult areas like California to Moskow, so that I even connect 
if I get a bad connection. Its difficult for me to hear a ring in Moskow, 
because the modem there is quite busy and also the network into Russia is 
often overloaded.)

-- 
   _________________________________________________________________________
   Wolfgang Henke        wolfgang@henke.sf-bay.org       wolfgang@netcom.com
Xref: sparky comp.dcom.modems:11045 comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware:20168
From: leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware
Subject: Re: 14,400 bps: Does any comm software support it?
Date: 23 Jul 92 18:32:25 GMT
Reply-To: 70465.203@compuserve.com
Organization: SCN Research/Qic Laboratories of Tigard, Oregon.

csjohn@knuth.mtsu.edu (Bullwinkle) writes:

>I will be getting a 14,400 bps v.32/v.32bis/v.42/v.42bis
>fax/modem soon.  I have noticed that on all of the MSDOS
>and OS/2 communications software that I have seen there is
>no setting for 14,400 bps, although there is for 9600 bps and
>19,200 bps.   Is there any way to access the 14,400 bps
>speed, or am I stuck at 9600 bps for now?  Is there any software
>out there that supports 14,400 bps?  Thanks. 

You set the port *and* modem to talk at 19200. And you use RTS/CTS
handshaking to avoid overruning the modem.

-- 
Leonard Erickson		      leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com
CIS: [70465,203]			 70465.203@compuserve.com
FIDO:   1:105/56	 Leonard.Erickson@f56.n105.z1.fidonet.org
(The CIS address is checked daily. The others infrequently)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
From: kc@netcom.com (Dameon D. Welch)
Subject: Re: Practical Peripherals PM14400FX -- V.42bis problems
Date: Sun, 26 Jul 92 07:01:51 GMT
Organization: Wayne's World, Inc -- NOT!

In article <BgDeoB1w165w@bigtime.wa.com> larry@bigtime.wa.com (Larry Gilbert) writes:
>This modem of mine will frequently forget how to speak V.42bis or MNP.  When
>this happens, it will try and try to establish such a connection, but fall back
>to a normal connection anyway.  The only fix is to reset my computer, either
>with a hard reset or a power cycle.

Ah, someone else on the 'net was complaining about this. Since I don't use
my modem for long periods of time without cycling the power (I turn it off
after I'm done using it for the time being), I have never had this problem.

If you call PPI's Tech Support and bug 'em, you can get the beta
version of the ROM that's supposed to fix the problem. The 1.12c ROM
fixed a few problems (modem speaker, 1200 baud connects, a small
discrepency in help), but apparently not that one.

Kind of a bummer, but at least the modem works better than the Supra's or
Zooms (from what I've heard anyway).



-- 
   Dameon Welch      Santa Clara University Design Center      kc@netcom.com
                    Help, I'm trapped in a .signature file
From: yarvin@highlite.gotham.com
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Date: 17 Jul 92 09:19 MDT
Subject: Problem with ZOOM v32bis
Nf-ID: #N:1992Jul17.051926.4821@highlite.u:1840998662:001:479
Nf-From: highlite.gotham.com!yarvin    Jul 17 09:19:00 1992


I just bought a ZOOM v32bis modem from Egghead Software, and I'm
having some connection problems with it.  Sometimes it connects
fine, but sometimes it

(1connects, goes through the handshaking sequence, then refuses
to issue a CONNECT message

or

pretends to connect successfully, but just prints some garbage and
never gets a proper connection.

Is this a known bug, or is it more likely the result of the cruddy
comm package (EasyLink II)?

Curtis
yarvin@highlite.gotham.com

Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
From: mjl@newton.auto.tuwien.ac.at (Martin J. Laubach)
Subject: Re: Phone line compatibility with high-speed modems (AMLs)
Organization: Technical University of Vienna
Distribution: na
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1992 11:54:30 GMT

| Apparently, an AML is an encoding box which allows you to piggyback one 
| phone line on top of another.
| [..]
| Does anyone know what the effects of these things are?
| I thought that any line that carries voice at phone-company standards
| of quality would be able to carry modem signals..

  The phone company over here (state monopoly, ugh!) has a similar device.
You'll get a box installed at your place that will split up the physical
line into two phone lines.

  Your main line works as before. The AML however will be modulated by
that box onto with carrier frequency of about 20kHz before being sent
over the line.

  Of course, due to the modulation and the low carrier frequency, the
modulated line's sound quality is somewhat lower -- while this may be
all right for voice, it can cause some problems with data transmissions.

	mjl



Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
From: karl@ddsw1.mcs.com (Karl Denninger)
Subject: Re: Boom! You're Dead.
Summary: The point is it can be disabled (to make it out-of-band)
Organization: Macro Computer Solutions, Inc., Chicago, IL
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1992 15:28:02 GMT
X-Disclaimer:  Material posted in this article is the sole responsibility of
                the poster and does not represent MCSNet or the system owners.

In article <1992Jul20.190859.18232@qiclab.scn.rain.com> 70465.203@compuserve.com writes:
>karl@ddsw1.mcs.com (Karl Denninger) writes:
>
>>Wrong!  >127 is DISABLED for the escape character.  Thanks for playing.  
>>Go read your modem manual please...... (I have)
>
>>Any sensible implementation of in-band signalling has a way to turn it off.
>
>True, but on *my* modem, I *can* set the escape character to something 
>in the 128-255 range. Telebit T2500 manual page 5-36:
>
>"The S2 register contains the code to be interpreted as the escape
>character. See registers S12 and S55. If S48=0, setting this register to
>a value greater than 127 disables the recognition of the escape character
>by the modem."
>
>So if S48=1, and S2=255 my escape character is 255.

And if S48=0 (which is the default) then  the escape is disabled.

--
Karl Denninger (karl@ddsw1.MCS.COM, <well-connected>!ddsw1!karl)
Data Line: [+1 312 248-0900] Anon. arch. (nuucp) 00:00-06:00 C[SD]T
Request file: /u/public/sources/DIRECTORY/README for instructions