Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!watmath!iuvax!rutgers!netnews.upenn.edu!eniac.seas.upenn.edu!ferris
From: ferris@eniac.seas.upenn.edu (Richard  Ferris)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc
Subject: Re: Procomm vs VAX
Summary: Binary mode solution
Message-ID: <14656@netnews.upenn.edu>
Date: 21 Sep 89 22:02:19 GMT
References: <42900050@uicsrd.csrd.uiuc.edu> <2517ADEA.28338@maccs.dcss.mcmaster.ca> <1611@tellab5.tellabs.CHI.IL.US>
Reply-To: ferris@eniac.seas.upenn.edu.UUCP (Richard  Ferris)
Organization: University of Pennsylvania
Lines: 19


In article <1611@tellab5.tellabs.CHI.IL.US> fayne@tellab5.UUCP (Jeffrey Fayne) writes:
>
>    I too have had problems with the built in kermit protocol.  Since we are 
>using a voice over data multiplexer link to our VAX, we attributed the problems to the multiplexer port, but seeing someone else with the same problem, it 
>looks like Procomm's fault. What we ended up doing is to create two .BAT files,

I have found the most important problem with Kermit is making sure that
both the mainframe version and procomm version are set for the same
file type - which is usually binary.  I have never seen Procomm kermit
fail except for that reason.  However, it does have the disadvantage of
limited packet size and thus using an external kermit allows faster
transfers.

RF

Richard T. Ferris
ferris@eniac.seas.upenn.edu
University of Pennsylvania