rlcarr@athena.mit.edu (Richard L. Carreiro) (01/19/91)
I've heard that since the V.32bis standard hasn't been frozen yet, the USR modems with V.32bis cannot be guaranteed to work with whatever the eventual standard is. Is this true? Also, do you think Telebit will be incorporating V.32bis once the standard is frozen? -- Rich Carreiro The "War on Drugs" ARPA: rlcarr@athena.mit.edu is merely a smokescreen for UUCP: ...!mit-eddie!mit-athena!rlcarr The War on the Constitution BITNET: rlcarr@athena.mit.edu JITTLOV FOREVER!
tnixon@hayes.uucp (01/24/91)
In article <1991Jan19.015521.22170@athena.mit.edu>, rlcarr@athena.mit.edu (Richard L. Carreiro) writes: > I've heard that since the V.32bis standard hasn't been frozen yet, the > USR modems with V.32bis cannot be guaranteed to work with whatever > the eventual standard is. > > Is this true? No. V.32bis has been technically accepted by CCITT Study Group XVII, and is currently under ballot among the CCITT member countries. The ballot closes on February 22nd. It is _extremely_ unlikely that V.32bis would not pass this ballot unanimously, and only 70% affirmative votes are required for it to be formally adopted as a CCITT Recommendation. If there were 31% or more NO votes (an infinitesimally small chance), then the Study Group would have to take technical comments into consideration and rework the document. But, unless it is voted down, there will be NO TECHNICAL CHANGES to V.32bis before it is adopted. -- Toby Nixon, Principal Engineer | Voice +1-404-449-8791 Telex 151243420 Hayes Microcomputer Products Inc. | Fax +1-404-447-0178 CIS 70271,404 P.O. Box 105203 | UUCP uunet!hayes!tnixon AT&T !tnixon Atlanta, Georgia 30348 USA | Internet hayes!tnixon@uunet.uu.net
root@zswamp.fidonet.org (Geoffrey Welsh) (01/27/91)
>From: tnixon@hayes.uucp >In article <1991Jan19.015521.22170@athena.mit.edu>, >rlcarr@athena.mit.edu (Richard L. Carreiro) writes: > I've heard that since the V.32bis standard hasn't been frozen yet, the > USR modems with V.32bis cannot be guaranteed to work with whatever > the eventual standard is. >[...] But, unless it is voted down, there will be NO >TECHNICAL CHANGES to V.32bis before it is adopted. This should not diminish the buyers' caution: the manufacturers may ttake some time to work out the finer points of protocol negotiation, etc. [I realize that, considering your employment, you may not wish to agree with me on this issue] In my opinion, this is not a good time to be shopping for a high-speed modem. Even the V.42 and V.42bis firmware that I've been playing with lately tends to cause bugaboos when calling anything but the device's twin. I suspect that it will be a while before manufacturers get the broad feedback and fine-tune their products to the point where V.42bis over V.32bis connections will work with the same simple reliability that calling from a 2400 currently does. -- UUCP: watmath!xenitec!zswamp!root | 602-66 Mooregate Crescent Internet: root@zswamp.fidonet.org | Kitchener, Ontario FidoNet: SYSOP, 1:221/171 | N2M 5E6 CANADA Data: (519) 742-8939 | (519) 741-9553 MC Hammer, n. Device used to ensure firm seating of MicroChannel boards Try our new Molson 'C' compiler... it specializes in 'case' statements!
schuster@cup.portal.com (Michael Alan Schuster) (01/30/91)
>In my opinion, this is not a good time to be shopping for a high-speed >modem. Even the V.42 and V.42bis firmware that I've been playing with lately >tends to cause bugaboos when calling anything but the device's twin. I suspec t Heh. I have to laugh at this comment. Has there =ever= been a "good time" to shop for a high-speed modem? Is there likely to be one in the next year? They don't call it the "bleeding edge" for nothing. Frankly, I don't worry about immature firware. That's what tech support folks are for. As long as the hardware design is solid, and the company is willing to support it without having you mail back the modem for something as trivial as a chip swap.
tech@mich-ns.UUCP (Mich. Network Sys. TECH SUPPORT) (02/28/91)
In article <1991Jan19.015521.22170@athena.mit.edu> rlcarr@athena.mit.edu (Richard L. Carreiro) writes: >I've heard that since the V.32bis standard hasn't been frozen yet, the >USR modems with V.32bis cannot be guaranteed to work with whatever >the eventual standard is. > >Is this true? > >Also, do you think Telebit will be incorporating V.32bis once the >standard is frozen? > As I Telebit distributor, I can assure you that Telebit will have a very good V.32bis program. This will come in the form of new products as well as upgrade paths. There is rumored to be a prototype already in the final stages of testing, but nothing concrete yet. Regarding the USR modems currently offering "V.32bis": You are correct: There are no guarentees that it will be compliant with the final standards which will be voted on by the CCITT on March 1st. You have to ask USR if they will provide a fix FREE OF CHARGE if the final standard turns out to be different. If the answer is NO, then perhaps its time for a little patience in waiting for V.32bis. Telebit's motto is "We will sell no modem before its time" (I know - its an over-used cliche). When the standard is finalized, Telebit will put the finishing touches on its V.32bis products and only after extensive testing, will it release the product. I really don't know what all of the fuss is about V.32bis. PEP will out-perform V.32bis in a lot of cases and PEP may even be getting faster in future products. John Michigan Network Systems. -- Michigan Network Systems Technical Support Division Telebit/SCO/Digiboard Reseller BBS: +1 313 343 0800 1-800-736-5984
grr@cbmvax.commodore.com (George Robbins) (03/01/91)
In article <15@mich-ns.UUCP> tech@.UUCP (Mich. Network Sys. TECH SUPPORT) writes: > > I really don't know what all of the fuss is about V.32bis. PEP will > out-perform V.32bis in a lot of cases and PEP may even be getting > faster in future products. The fuss is simple. I like Telebit modems, we've bought dozens, they work good. On the other hand, I can't justify buying any new modems that don't also support V.32bis, nor do I wish to buy any V.32bis modems that don't talk to PEP. Therefore until Telebit publicly commits to a PEP/V.32bis product I can't plan for new Telebit modems, nor do I wish to go to their competition. No modem before it's time, I can understand. No public commitment indicates some kind of lack of faith and promotes the suspicion that Telebit is no longer competitive now that V32.bis is a official standard and PEP only a highly useful defacto auxilliary mode... -- George Robbins - now working for, uucp: {uunet|pyramid|rutgers}!cbmvax!grr but no way officially representing: domain: grr@cbmvax.commodore.com Commodore, Engineering Department phone: 215-431-9349 (only by moonlite)
jparnas@larouch.uucp (Jacob Parnas) (03/03/91)
In article <15@mich-ns.UUCP>, tech@mich-ns.UUCP (Mich. Network Sys. TECH SUPPORT) writes: |> ... |> Telebit's motto is "We will sell no modem before its time" (I know - its |> an over-used cliche). When the standard is finalized, Telebit will put |> the finishing touches on its V.32bis products and only after extensive |> testing, will it release the product. |> |> John |> Michigan Network Systems. |> Telebit/SCO/Digiboard Reseller BBS: +1 313 343 0800 |> 1-800-736-5984 I don't mean to pick on you or Telebit personally John, but I'd like to say that a lot of modem vendors lose my business (and my guess is a lot of other people's business too) due to this policy. Our main use of modems is purely for SLIP from home to our lab. SLIP is a protocol that requires all of the speed that it can get. The difference between 9600 and 14400 base speed is extremely noticable using stuff like ftp, xmh, and many other programs over SLIP's TCP/IP link. Many of our users use work machines from home machines over SLIP for hours a day. Thus, having V.32bis months earlier than other modem vendors is a gigantic plus for vendors that get it early like US Robotics. I've found the V.32 bis modem from US Robotics to be very reliable in the week and half I've been using it. Their modems have proven to be more reliable over lines with noise than at least one vendor that uses the motto you mention in your article (See Data Communication's recent article on high speed modems). Further, I'm fairly confident that if there is a change in the final V.32 bis standard, they will have an new prom available to fix it (if they don't, it would really hurt them in the future). Absolute worst case is that I have to connect at V.42 bis instead of V.32 bis to some other places in the future (which we rarely do). It seems that for me and other people that really benefit from increased speed, buying modems from vendors that get high speed protocols implemented very early is the only smart way to go. Telebit is a fine company. I don't mean to insult them. Their PEP protocol is really the only way to go over very poor phone lines and is excellent for UUCP transfers. I just think wish they and other vendors would understand that for many people, the speed of the modem as long as it is fairly reliable is the most important aspect of a modem. I'd also like to thank and congratulate vendors that get high speed modems out really early. They make my work from home more pleasant and productive. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ | Jacob M. Parnas | DISCLAIMER: The above message is from | | IBM Thomas J. Watson Research Ctr. | me and is not from my employer. IBM | | Arpanet: jparnas@ibm.com | might completely disagree with me. | | Bitnet: jparnas@yktvmx.bitnet \---------------------------------------| | Home: ..!uunet!bywater!acheron!larouch!jparnas | Phone: (914) 945-1635 | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
tech@mich-ns.UUCP (Mich. Network Sys. TECH SUPPORT) (03/04/91)
In article <19377@cbmvax.commodore.com> grr@cbmvax.commodore.com (George Robbins) writes: "In article <15@mich-ns.UUCP> tech@.UUCP (Mich. Network Sys. TECH SUPPORT) writes: "> "> I really don't know what all of the fuss is about V.32bis. PEP will "> out-perform V.32bis in a lot of cases and PEP may even be getting "> faster in future products. " "The fuss is simple. I like Telebit modems, we've bought dozens, they "work good. On the other hand, I can't justify buying any new modems "that don't also support V.32bis, nor do I wish to buy any V.32bis modems "that don't talk to PEP. " "Therefore until Telebit publicly commits to a PEP/V.32bis product I can't "plan for new Telebit modems, nor do I wish to go to their competition. " "No modem before it's time, I can understand. No public commitment "indicates some kind of lack of faith and promotes the suspicion that "Telebit is no longer competitive now that V32.bis is a official "standard and PEP only a highly useful defacto auxilliary mode... " "-- But they HAVE made a commitment to V.32bis. If you call 1-800-TELEBIT and ask them if they will support V.32bis, they will tell you YES - ABSOLUTLY! That is what they are telling the distributors and the public. They do not yet have a V.32bis modem out because V.32bis as a standard has not yet stabilized. Anything that you get out there today that is "V.32bis" is likley to be an unstable implementation. Again - what is the big deal with V.32bis. Like I said. Current and future implementations of PEP will blow it away. If you need to be compatible with other standards, get a T2500. As I understand, V.32bis modems will talk to V.32 modems just fine. (I may be wrong). Telebit tells me that they WILL be supporting V.32bis in both new products and product upgrades. I'm sure they will provide an upgrade for their T2500 since this is their top-of-the-line modem. John tech@mich-ns -- Michigan Network Systems Technical Support Division Telebit/SCO/Digiboard Reseller BBS: +1 313 343 0800 1-800-736-5984
larry@nstar.rn.com (Larry Snyder) (03/04/91)
tech@mich-ns.UUCP (Mich. Network Sys. TECH SUPPORT) writes: >standard has not yet stabilized. Anything that you get out there today >that is "V.32bis" is likley to be an unstable implementation. Yes - but if the vendor is willing to continue to support the product as v.32bis is ratified - nothing is lost - In our case, we needed the additional throughput of v.32bis since we are running a pair of USR V.32/v.32bis/v.42bis modems over a leased line running SLIP. The USR modems produce ftp transfers of around 2.4 kb/sec while the pure V.32 only around 1.4. Since USR is the only company currently shipping v.32bis, their modems are in use. USR promises upgrades to keep the modems current with v.32bis as it is ratified - and USR has a history of excellent support with free ROM upgrades fixing bugs and adding features. -- Larry Snyder, NSTAR Public Access Unix 219-289-0287 (HST/PEP/V.32/v.42bis) regional UUCP mapping coordinator {larry@nstar.rn.com, ..!uunet!nstar.rn.com!larry}