snoopy@sopwith (Snoopy) (12/19/90)
A local site recently installed a shiny new Telebit T2500. It
seems that TrailBlazer Plus modems (4.0 ROMs) cannot connect to
it in PEP mode. T1000 modems can. How bizzare. A similar T2500
only 2-3 weeks older, but with different ROMs ( GE6.01-T2500 )
programmed nearly the same (modulo a few rs232 settings that
"shouldn't" matter, and a couple new registers that the new ROMs
have that the old ROMs don't) works fine.
Listening in, both the V.32 and PEP tones sound significantly different
than other Telebits.
Local Telebit wizards are baffled. Theories: (1) There is something
"broken" in this T2500. (2) The GF7.00 ROMs are bad, Telebit didn't
do enough regression testing.
Ideas, netland?
Here are the register settings of the "bad" T2500:
E0 F1 M1 Q1 P V1 W0 X1 Y0 &P0 &T4 Version GF7.00-T2500SA
S00=001 S01=000 S02=043 S03=013 S04=010 S05=008 S06=002 S07:090 S08=002 S09=006
S10=007 S11=070 S12=050 S18=000 S25=005 S26=000 S38:020
S41=000 S45=000 S47=004 S48=000 S49=000
S50=000 S51:005 S52:002 S54:003 S55:003 S56=017 S57=019 S58:000 S59=000
S61:000 S62=003 S63=001 S64:001 S65=000 S66:001 S67=000 S68=255 S69=000
S90=000 S91=000 S92:001 S93=008 S94=001 S95:002 S96=001 S97:001 S98=003
S100=000 S101=000 S102=000 S104=000 S105=001 S106:001 S107:050
S110:001 S111=255 S112=001
S121=000 S130:004 S131:001
S150=000 S151=004 S152=001 S153=001 S154=000 S155=000 S157=000 S158=000
S160=010 S161=020 S162=002 S163=003 S164=007 S169=000 S255=000
_____
/_____\ Snoopy
/_______\ cse.ogi.edu!sopwith!snoopy
|___| sun!nosun!qiclab!sopwith!snoopy
|___| uunet!tektronix!nosun!qiclab!sopwith!snoopyebersman@uunet.UU.NET (Paul Ebersman) (12/19/90)
Starting with ROM Revision 6.0 for T2500's, a v.25 guard tone was put
before PEP in the carrier tone sequence and other changes were made.
This can cause earlier ROM Revisions of T2500's and TB+'s to be unable
to connect.
Call 1-800-TELEBIT and they will be happy to explain the details,
as well as possible solutions.
--
Paul A. Ebersman @ UUNET Communications
uunet!ebersman or ebersman@uunet.uu.net
The difference between theory and practice in practice is greater
than the difference between theory and practice in theory.rjg@umnstat.uucp (Robert J. Granvin) (12/20/90)
I know I'll be corrected where I make misteaks... :-) In article <1990Dec19.044634.26743@sopwith> snoopy@sopwith.UUCP (Snoopy) writes: |A local site recently installed a shiny new Telebit T2500. It |seems that TrailBlazer Plus modems (4.0 ROMs) cannot connect to |it in PEP mode. T1000 modems can. How bizzare. A similar T2500 |only 2-3 weeks older, but with different ROMs ( GE6.01-T2500 ) |programmed nearly the same (modulo a few rs232 settings that |"shouldn't" matter, and a couple new registers that the new ROMs |have that the old ROMs don't) works fine. | |Listening in, both the V.32 and PEP tones sound significantly different |than other Telebits. | |Local Telebit wizards are baffled. Theories: (1) There is something |"broken" in this T2500. (2) The GF7.00 ROMs are bad, Telebit didn't |do enough regression testing. | |Ideas, netland? The 7.0 ROMs incorporate an extra tone to solve echo suppression problems on the Sprint network. Unfortunately, ROMs below 5.0 don't know too much about that, so they won't sync up. The T2500 could turn on the undocumented register that puts it back into "old" tones (I forget the register. It was posted here recently.) The other solution is to call Telebit and ask for the BC5.10A ROMs for the TB+. (Don't let them give you a hard time about it... Though I don't suspect they will... :-) Be warned, though, if you upgrade the TB+, other TB+'s with less than 5.0 ROMs will see the same problems with your upgraded modem that you were seeing with the T2500. (You have the same options to solve the problem there... Set the undocumented register, or update the other neighbor modems... Snowball effect.) Robert J. Granvin E/Mail: rjg@umnstat.stat.umn.edu User Services Specialist AT&T: +1 612 625 9224 School of Statistics University of Minnesota
jim@rwsys.lonestar.org (James Wyatt KA5VJL .) (12/21/90)
In article <114896@uunet.UU.NET> ebersman@uunet.UU.NET (Paul Ebersman) writes: >Starting with ROM Revision 6.0 for T2500's, a v.25 guard tone was put >before PEP in the carrier tone sequence and other changes were made. >This can cause earlier ROM Revisions of T2500's and TB+'s to be unable This is correct. As usual, Telebit has prepared for this. Setting s99 to 1 will alter the v.25 guard tone behaviour, permitting connection w/ T1000s. The T2500 really is a fantastic box - I wish my Supra 2400 worked as well. ---- James Wyatt (KA5VJL) - Standard disclaimer applies... (H)817-595-0571 {letni.lonestar.org,merch.tandy.com}!rwsys.lonestar.org!jim (W)817-390-2864
kdq@demott.com (Kevin D. Quitt) (12/21/90)
In article <1990Dec19.044634.26743@sopwith> snoopy@sopwith (Snoopy) writes: >A local site recently installed a shiny new Telebit T2500. It >seems that TrailBlazer Plus modems (4.0 ROMs) cannot connect to >it in PEP mode. Feel free to call their tech support. Great guys. They just solved this problem for me (I've got the new unit). On the NEW modem, set S120 to 16 (this shortens the PEP search). If 2400BPS modems have trouble connecting to the new modem, set its S93 to 4 to shorten the V.32 recognition tones. -- _ Kevin D. Quitt demott!kdq kdq@demott.com DeMott Electronics Co. 14707 Keswick St. Van Nuys, CA 91405-1266 VOICE (818) 988-4975 FAX (818) 997-1190 MODEM (818) 997-4496 PEP last
peter@micromuse.co.uk (Peter Galbavy) (12/21/90)
In article <1990Dec19.044634.26743@sopwith> snoopy@sopwith.UUCP (Snoopy) writes: >A local site recently installed a shiny new Telebit T2500. It >seems that TrailBlazer Plus modems (4.0 ROMs) cannot connect to >it in PEP mode. T1000 modems can. How bizzare. A similar T2500 >only 2-3 weeks older, but with different ROMs ( GE6.01-T2500 ) >programmed nearly the same (modulo a few rs232 settings that >"shouldn't" matter, and a couple new registers that the new ROMs >have that the old ROMs don't) works fine. I have a similar problem with my feed trying to connect to me in PEP mode when I have the PEP tones at the end of the sequence. And guess what: >S90=000 S91=000 S92:001 S93=008 S94=001 S95:002 S96=001 S97:001 S98=003 S92=1 :-( Which is the same. Try maybe with S92=0 and see... If this works then we both have the same/similar problem. My ROMS are GF7.00, do not know what my feeds ROMS are - If you're reading this Nigel: Any idea ? Merry Xmas all. -- Peter Galbavy Tech Support, Micromuse Ltd Phone: +44 71 352 7774 E-Mail: P.Galbavy@micromuse.co.uk Disclaimer: Time flies like an arrow... Fruit flies like a banana
larry@nstar.rn.com (Larry Snyder) (12/21/90)
kdq@demott.com (Kevin D. Quitt) writes: > On the NEW modem, set S120 to 16 (this shortens the PEP search). If >2400BPS modems have trouble connecting to the new modem, set its S93 to >4 to shorten the V.32 recognition tones. what version of firmware supports this? -- Larry Snyder, Northern Star Communications, Notre Dame, IN USA {larry@nstar.rn.com, uunet!nstar!larry, larry%nstar@iuvax.cs.indiana.edu} backbone usenet newsfeeds available Public Access Unix Site (219) 289-0282 (5 high speed lines)
kdq@demott.com (Kevin D. Quitt) (12/22/90)
In article <1990Dec21.115205.5385@nstar.rn.com> larry@nstar.rn.com (Larry Snyder) writes: >kdq@demott.com (Kevin D. Quitt) writes: > >> On the NEW modem, set S120 to 16 (this shortens the PEP search). If >>2400BPS modems have trouble connecting to the new modem, set its S93 to >>4 to shorten the V.32 recognition tones. > >what version of firmware supports this? According to the tbit tech, S120 used to be documented, but too many people screwed things up by playing with it. It's apparently been there for a long time. Our modem is GF7.00-T2500SA. -- _ Kevin D. Quitt demott!kdq kdq@demott.com DeMott Electronics Co. 14707 Keswick St. Van Nuys, CA 91405-1266 VOICE (818) 988-4975 FAX (818) 997-1190 MODEM (818) 997-4496 PEP last
cec@cup.portal.com (Cerafin E Castillo) (12/22/90)
Here are some answers, which I have verified with Telebit, about some of the
aforementioned S-Register settings in the NEW GF7.00/BC7.00 code and
some of the BA4.00/BC4.00 code that is still around.
S120=16 works only in GF7.00/BC7.00 firmware releases. The S120 register
is normally associated with changes to PEP packetization when PEP is used
over adverse communications links (ie long distance, international, satellite,
etc.). S120=12 is a common setting in such situations. In earlier firmware
such as 5.00/4.00/3.01, S120=16 is accessible but does not make any changes
to PEP. In GF7.00/BC7.00 S120=16 cancels the 3 second answer tone issued
before the PEP tones (ie Telebit moose call ;-). Combined with S93=4, which
reduces the AC V.32 answer tone, this allows for a faster train-up in PEP.
S120=16 also alleviates some problems caused by the V.25 tone used in GF7.00
/BC7.00. That is, if a BA5.01/GF7.00/BC7.00 firmware modem, with its
S50=0 set, hears the V.25 tones issued for a PEP connection (S50=255 OR S92=0)
by the answering GF7.00/BC7.00 modem; it will try and connect in V.32. As
it becomes aware of the PEP connection being requested by the answering
modem, it will adjust to issuing the PEP tones to connect. Meanwhile, you
have gone through two train-up sessions which are eating up phone line cost
and, possibly, causing your automated file transfer (ie UUCP) to time out.
This is where S120=16 in the answering modem and S50=255 in the calling modem
will be of great help.
Similarly, when a GF7.00/BC7.00 answering modem is set to S50=255 or S92=0
and a calling BA4.00/BC4.00 modem is set S50=0, the call will fail. This may
be due to the PEP tones following the V.25 tones. Remember, the V.25 tones
issued in GF7.00/BC7.00 PEP connections are the same as those issued for the
V.32, V.22bis, etc., answer sequences. Revision 4.00 modems may react
adversely to V.25 tones being followed by PEP tones. The 7.00 modem is set
to answer in V.25 tones followed by PEP tones (S92=0). As the 4.00 modem
starts to connect and react positively to the V.25 tones of the GF7.00/BC7.00
answering modem, the PEP tones kick in from the answering modem and, in the
confusion that follows, the connection is aborted. This is as close to the
scenerio that was given to me by Telebit as I could come. My conclusion
on the aborted connection is based on my experience with the modem answering
sequences and train-up procedures. I welcome any corrections on the V.25
aspect of the answering sequence, since I'm not too familiar with the info
exchanged in this tone. This V.25 tone is used to prevent problems caused
by echo suppressors and companders in certain long distance carriers such
as MCI and SPRINT. Again, S120=16 and S93=4 might help, but an upgrade
(BA5.01 for TrailBlazer Plus/T2000) is recommended to alleviate this situation.
I hope this info helps. This is meant to be an informational posting.
==============================================================================
Cerafin E. Castillo || //\\ ||\\ ||
Network Consultant || //__\\ || \\ || Los Altos
Los Altos Networks || // ---\\|| \\|| Networks
340 Second St. #6 ||___// \ | \ |
Los Altos, CA 94022
(415) 941-8031 UUCP: {apple,sun,uunet}!portal!cup.portal.com!cec
INTERNET: cec@cup.poral.com
"...No hay mal que por bien no venga..."
===============================================================================andrew@acwbust.incom.de (Andrew Wheadon) (12/29/90)
In article <1990Dec21.113843.6431@micromuse.co.uk> peter@micromuse.co.uk (Peter Galbavy) writes: >>A local site recently installed a shiny new Telebit T2500. It >>seems that TrailBlazer Plus modems (4.0 ROMs) cannot connect to >>it in PEP mode. T1000 modems can. How bizzare. > >I have a similar problem with my feed trying to connect to me in PEP >mode when I have the PEP tones at the end of the sequence. And guess >what: > >>S90=000 S91=000 S92:001 S93=008 S94=001 S95:002 S96=001 S97:001 S98=003 > >S92=1 :-( Which is the same. Try maybe with S92=0 and see... If this >works then we both have the same/similar problem. > >My ROMS are GF7.00, do not know what my feeds ROMS are - If you're >reading this Nigel: Any idea ? I too have a TB2500 with the same ROMS and had problems connecting to a site which sent it's PEP tones at the end. I solved it by ringing up the site with S50=255 locking PEP and setting S7=70 a very long connect time. But I have another "Problem": Has anyone succeeded in getting higher cps-rates than 1340 cps ? And if Yes then: What Unix-System, Card (standard or special), Driver,special Settings ? I'm talking about a uucp connection and I'm using the Message given to me by uucico -x5 -r1 -ssystem telling me the transfer-rates as a reference. Andrew ------