bdb@becker.UUCP (Bruce Becker) (05/02/89)
This message is a question for Telebit Trailblazer sites: In high-speed mode the Trailblazer can support several asynchronous protocols. It has been my understanding that the correct configuration for modems was to indicate general protocol support (S111=255) on autoanswer, and to specify which, if any, protocol was to be used (S111=30 for uucp) when dialling out. Recent experience shows that it is possible that not all sites adhere to this convention, but instead use S111=255 for both answer & dialling out, or else S111=30. Earlier on, I had been using S111=30, but changed over to the above description. However I have come across some sites which default to S111=255, which means that no protocol support ends up being negotiated. In the case of uucp calls, this results in a quite significant loss of throughput. I'm soliciting whatever commentary & discussion is warranted on this topic... -- __ Bruce Becker Toronto, Ont. w \cc/ Internet: bdb@becker.UUCP, bruce@gpu.utcs.toronto.edu `/v/-e BitNet: BECKER@HUMBER.BITNET _< >_ "Where is Newton Minow now that we need him?" - T. S. Eliot
cks@ziebmef.uucp (Chris Siebenmann) (05/04/89)
In article <465@becker.UUCP> bdb@becker.UUCP (Bruce Becker) writes: | Recent experience shows that it is possible that not all | sites adhere to this convention, but instead use S111=255 | for both answer & dialling out, or else S111=30. S111=30 for dialin and dialout should be no problem with uucp connections; they always get the high-speed mode. People with S111=255 on dialout should be gently told that there's an easy way to vastly improve their uucp performance; you can also make a point of calling them instead of vice versa. I wouldn't worry about the performance loss unless they're tying up a lot of your modem time. -- "Oh BLESS you, sir! The ANGEL OF DEATH was after me just as SURE as you're standing there, yes he WAS!" Chris Siebenmann uunet!{utgpu!moore,attcan!telly}!ziebmef!cks cks@ziebmef.UUCP or .....!utgpu!{,ontmoh!,ncrcan!brambo!}cks