gaynor@agvax2.ag.ohio-state.edu (06/05/91)
Here's the situation: I run a VMS system with users in each of Ohio's 88 counties. These users dial in over 6 WATS lines. Most of the users are using older 1200 baud modems purchased in 85-87. Previously, on the WATS lines, we had a bank of rack-mounted Racal-Vadic VA212PAR modems (1200 baud). In order to accoomodate users that are starting to buy new modems (2400, some with MNP), and to generally improve things, we purchased some Intel 9600/EX modems, and put them on the WATS rotation. (leaving some of the old Racals in there, too.) The result? The 2400 baud users were happy, and the few with MNP are ecstatic. We were planning on helping a number of the users (which are actually remote offices of this organization) upgrade their modems to the Intels. BUT. We're having severe problems with users of the older 1200 baud modems. A number of them can't even connect to the new Intels. And many of those that do connect to the Intels (the Intels, obviously, ramp down to 1200 for those folks) are seeing a -huge- increase in line-noise related garbage, compared to a connection to the Racals. So much, in fact, as to render the connection virtually useless. Invesitigating, I'm beginning to hear various things. Problems with MNP modems connecting to non-MNP. Problems with the Rockwell chip set used by Intel. Problems specific to Intel modems. All of it anecdotal. A good portion of it with the feel of rumor. Does anyone have hard data on what may be causing this? And, more importantly, on what can be done to end it. We -have- to support the 1200 baud users (and the 2400, and 2400 MNP). But we also want to make 9600bps and the benfits of MNP and the CCIT standards available to our users. It doesn't have to be Intel, but I'll need a good reason to drop them. Thank you, in advance, for your comments and assistance. I will summarize to this newsgroup at a later time... --- Jim Gaynor - AgVAX System Manager - Academic Computing - Ohio State University VMS:<gaynor@agvax2.ag.ohio-state.edu> UNIX:<gaynor@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu> Disclaimer : All opinions expressed here are mine and only mine. So there! Witty Quote: "Think, think, think, think..." - Winnie-the-Pooh, Taoist Bear.
robinson@ecsvax.uncecs.edu (Gerard Robinson) (06/29/91)
I purchased one of these after asking INTEL marketing specifically whether the modem would handle all types of older modems, explaining that I'd had a problem with UDS V.3225 units (until UDS sent up prom upgrades for free). Assurances, assurances... Well upon opening the box, out fell a little slip of paper indicating that one might have to *disable* all the nice features (MNP, etc.) to get it to work with older modems. Real *NICE* :-) Even with that we've had considerable trouble, so much so that it is no longer worth the extra $150 we supposedly saved by not buying UDS. INTEL apparently only thought of this as a dial-out modem, not dial-in. Good luck ... Gerard Robinson
davidg%aegis.or.jp@kyoto-u.ac.jp (Dave McLane) (06/30/91)
robinson@ecsvax.uncecs.edu (Gerard Robinson) writes: > longer worth the extra $150 we supposedly saved by not buying UDS. INTEL > apparently only thought of this as a dial-out modem, not dial-in. Isn't it the truth. IMHO, except for Telebit, *all* modems are designed primarily for users to call out, not for heavy-duty answering. Some people may well scream "What about the USR!" but even though it's used on a lot of BBS, I still think it wasn't *designed* for that. You only have to look at the number of things you can set on a Telebit to configure it to particular conditions to be convinced. FYI, Telebit puts out some super heavy duty information sheets on how to configure the modem for adverse situations. They are the only mfg that seems to accept the facts of life that all telco links are not equal. Dave -- Dave McLane <davidg%aegis.or.jp@kyoto-u.ac.jp> ** Not connected with Telebit in any way, except as sysop/sysadm who ** ** appreciates being able to make my modems do what I want them to. **