snoopy@sopwith.UUCP (Snoopy) (05/01/89)
In article <1989Apr29.224526.22914@utzoo.uucp> henry@utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer) writes: |In article <1RH0R8#4BF6fX=eric@snark.uu.net> eric@snark.uu.net (Eric S. Raymond) writes: |>Result? The 'blazer has to have S58=0 (no handshake) or S58=3 (XON/XOFF) set |>for the T5100 to even *open* it -- and XON/XOFF isn't usable because the start |>and stop chars are in-band for UUCP's 'g' protocol. Without handshaking |>dropped characters are inevitable. Massive lossage either way. | |Aha, a chance to catch Eric in an error! :-) The uucp-spoofing mode in the |Trailblazer, when it kicks in, shuts XON/XOFF off, so there is no conflict. Aha, a chance to catch Henry in an error! :-) (rare indeed!) The uucp-spoofing only works using PEP, so if you have low-speed uucp connections with XON/XOFF enabled they will die. BTW, is the uucp-spoofing-turning-off- XON/XOFF feature documented anywhere? This is the first I've heard of it. |With a packet protocol running between host and modem, you don't need any |low-level handshaking if your host interface is halfway well built. Which is very good, since so much hardware drops the ball on hardware flow control. According to the fine documentation, my system thinks that DTR is the proper pin to use for flow control, rather than RTS. (Someday I'll get my 'scope back from the shop and verify this...) <grumble> |Mars in 1980s: USSR, 2 tries, | Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology |2 failures; USA, 0 tries. | uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry henry@zoo.toronto.edu How many tries for Canada? _____ /_____\ Snoopy "My dot-matrix does Postscript." /_______\ |___| tekecs.gwd.tek.com!sopwith!snoopy qiclab!sopwith!snoopy |___| sun!nosun!illian!sopwith!snoopy parsely!sopwith!snoopy
henry@utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer) (05/02/89)
In article <163@sopwith.UUCP> snoopy@sopwith.UUCP (Snoopy) writes: >|Aha, a chance to catch Eric in an error! :-) The uucp-spoofing mode in the >|Trailblazer, when it kicks in, shuts XON/XOFF off, so there is no conflict. > >Aha, a chance to catch Henry in an error! :-) (rare indeed!) The >uucp-spoofing only works using PEP, so if you have low-speed uucp connections >with XON/XOFF enabled they will die... Touche'. (What, the whole world doesn't have Trailblazers yet?? :-)) >BTW, is the uucp-spoofing-turning-off- >XON/XOFF feature documented anywhere? This is the first I've heard of it. It's totally undocumented; I confirmed my conjecture by asking Peter Honeyman (who wrote the uucp spoofing code). -- Mars in 1980s: USSR, 2 tries, | Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology 2 failures; USA, 0 tries. | uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry henry@zoo.toronto.edu
eric@snark.uu.net (Eric S. Raymond) (05/02/89)
In <163@sopwith.uucp> Snoopy wrote: > In article <1989Apr29.224526.22914@utzoo.uucp> Henry Spencer wrote: > |In article <1RH0R8#4BF6fX=eric@snark.uu.net> Eric S. Raymond wrote: > |Aha, a chance to catch Eric in an error! :-) The uucp-spoofing mode in the > |Trailblazer, when it kicks in, shuts XON/XOFF off, so there is no conflict. > > Aha, a chance to catch Henry in an error! :-) (rare indeed!) The > uucp-spoofing only works using PEP, so if you have low-speed uucp connections > with XON/XOFF enabled they will die. Actually, we may *both* be wrong. Rick Adams and others claim that low-speed UUCP via the 'Blazer works fine with no handshaking at all! -- Eric S. Raymond (the mad mastermind of TMN-Netnews) UUCP: {uunet!vu-vlsi!cbmvax}!snark!eric INTERNET: eric@snark.uu.net Post: 22 S. Warren Avenue, Malvern PA 19355 Phone: (215)-296-5718