ken@turtlevax.UUCP (Ken Turkowski) (04/16/85)
Distribution:
Soon, we will be able to dial long distance without using access codes,
regardless of whether we use AT&T, Sprint, MCI, etc. I have heard that
the quality of some long distance carriers is not good enough for data
communication. Does anyone have any proof that carriers other than
AT&T are usable for 1200 baud full duplex communications? How about
2400? We ought to assure that the data phones are connected to a
reliable carrier, otherwise uucp traffic will grind to a halt.
--
Ken Turkowski @ CADLINC, Menlo Park, CA
UUCP: {amd,decwrl,hplabs,nsc,seismo,spar}!turtlevax!ken
ARPA: turtlevax!ken@DECWRL.ARPAroy@phri.UUCP (Roy Smith) (04/19/85)
> Does anyone have any proof that carriers other than > AT&T are usable for 1200 baud full duplex communications? I experimented a while ago with running Bell 212 over Western Union (Metrophone, I think they call it) lines for uucp stuff. At the time we had the old (dial a 7 digit access code, then a 6 digit authorization code then a 10 digit number) kind of link. Signal quality was horrible (unless you restricted your data to { and ~, in which case it was just fine :-)). About a month ago they pulled a dirty trick on me and got hooked up with equal-access (dial 1 gets you to Metrophone instead of ATT) and didn't tell anybody for a week or so until after they did it. Guess what? I can't tell the difference in either signal quality (using uucico -x9) or effective baud rate (from uurate). I suspect that for some reason, the direct access gives you better quality service because you have to go through fewer switches. Anybody know for sure about this? -- allegra!phri!roy (Roy Smith) System Administrator, Public Health Research Institute