bob@ns.UUCP (Robert J. Mathias Jr.) (01/03/91)
In a previous article, I reported that CompuServe had purchased USR Dual standard modems. I have just found out that these modems are rack mounted and that CIS plans to only enable V.32 on these modems. It seems a pity that CIS does not play to enable HST mode. Also I cannot figure out why they chose the Dual Standard if they only plan on using V.32. -- Bob J. Mathias, Jr uucp: ...!uunet!ccicpg!uis-oc!ns.UUCP!bob Unisys Corporation voice: (714) 727-0323 A and V Series Systems Engineering fax: (714) 727-0350 Irvine, California
tnixon@hayes.uucp (01/07/91)
In article <49@ns.UUCP>, bob@ns.UUCP (Robert J. Mathias Jr.) writes: > In a previous article, I reported that CompuServe had purchased USR Dual > standard modems. I have just found out that these modems are rack mounted and > that CIS plans to only enable V.32 on these modems. It seems a pity that > CIS does not play to enable HST mode. Also I cannot figure out why they > chose the Dual Standard if they only plan on using V.32. When I asked a CompuServe rep about this, he explained that they aren't enabling HST mode for a very simple reason: once they offer a service, it is almost impossible to ever withdraw it or not offer it universally. Because only USR builds modems with the non-standard HST modulation, if CompuServe enabled HST modulation, they'd be locked into using only USR modems, forever and ever. They don't want this! They went with USR because few companies now have rack-mounted V.32 modems, but this won't be the case in the future. They want to be able to choose from a wide range of alternatives the NEXT time they go out to bid on modems, and not be stuck with having to provide a non-standard modulation forever. As to why they chose DS modems rather than just V.32s, it was probably because that was what was available at the time in sufficient qualitities. I'm sure CIS cut a good deal and didn't pay for the HST modulation they weren't going to use. -- 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
cbradley@Busl.COM (Chris Bradley) (01/08/91)
In article <49@ns.UUCP> bob@ns.UUCP (Robert J. Mathias Jr.) writes: >In a previous article, I reported that CompuServe had purchased USR Dual >standard modems. [complaint about non-HST suppressed] >I cannot figure out why they >chose the Dual Standard if they only plan on using V.32. Could this be a "vendor incentive?" :-) -- Chris Bradley | "Nothing is more certain than incertainties; Businessland Advanced Systems | Fortune is full of fresh variety: Dallas, Texas US | Constant in nothing but inconstancy." cbradley@busl.com | -- Richard Barnfield 1574-1627
larry@nstar.rn.com (Larry Snyder) (01/09/91)
tnixon@hayes.uucp writes: >In article <49@ns.UUCP>, bob@ns.UUCP (Robert J. Mathias Jr.) writes: >As to why they chose DS modems rather than just V.32s, it was >probably because that was what was available at the time in but wouldn't you think that they would at least keep the HST modulation "turned on" so those with DS modems could take advantage of the increased throughput over V.32? BTW - what is the speed of the line from the major and minor hub cities back to CIS? Are they using 56KB, T1 or X.25? -- Larry Snyder, NSTAR Public Access Unix 219-289-0282 (HST/PEP/V.32/v.42bis) regional UUCP mapping coordinator {larry@nstar.rn.com, ..!uunet!nstar!larry, larry%nstar@iuvax.cs.indiana.edu}
tnixon@hayes.uucp (01/10/91)
In article <1991Jan08.171427.29629@nstar.rn.com>, larry@nstar.rn.com (Larry Snyder) writes: >>As to why they chose DS modems rather than just V.32s, it was >>probably because that was what was available at the time in > > but wouldn't you think that they would at least keep the HST > modulation "turned on" so those with DS modems could take advantage > of the increased throughput over V.32? No, because that would also make the HST modulation available to HST-only users (not DS). Once CIS makes a service available, it is extremely difficult to take it back, so they'd be stuck providing HST modulation forever (and therefore locked into buying their modems from USR). > BTW - what is the speed of the line from the major and minor hub > cities back to CIS? Are they using 56KB, T1 or X.25? Depends on the city. Their internal network protocol is NOT X.25. Some of the links to smaller cities are 9600bps, most are 56Kbps, and some of the larger cities (i.e., all of the ones which currently have 9600bps service) are on T1. -- 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
bob@MorningStar.Com (Bob Sutterfield) (01/12/91)
In article <1991Jan08.171427.29629@nstar.rn.com> larry@nstar.rn.com (Larry Snyder) writes:
BTW - what is the speed of the line from the major and minor hub
cities back to CIS? Are they using 56KB, T1 or X.25?
A minor nit from someone who just spent two weeks documenting an X.25
implementation - X.25 isn't a speed, it's a (family of) protocols at
the Link layer of the ISO protocol stack model. It can run over the
things that you get from the phone company when you say "56Kb" or it
can run over the things that you get when you ask for "T1". It can
run over wires that are slower or faster, too, and the Amateur gang
runs something derivative that doesn't need wires (AX.25) and calls it
Packet Radio. There's even an Ethernet type field value assigned for
it (0x0805).