Path: utzoo!yunexus!ists!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cs.utexas.edu!usc!apple!fernwood!vixie!asylum!dab
From: dab@asylum.SF.CA.US (Dave Bridgham)
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip.ibmpc
Subject: Re: Analog versus DDS circuits for SLIP
Message-ID: <8485@asylum.SF.CA.US>
Date: 14 Nov 89 21:18:39 GMT
Article-I.D.: asylum.8485
References: <8911131302.aa02452@louie.udel.edu> <8911132103.AA24263@vax.ftp.com> <9289@batcomputer.tn.cornell.edu>
Reply-To: dab@asylum.UUCP (Dave Bridgham)
Organization: The Asylum; Belmont, CA
Lines: 7


The issue isn't analog vs. DDS but async vs. sync.  Generally when you
get up to DDS speeds (56kbps) you're using synchronous interfaces on
the ends.  SLIP provides framing.  Synchronous interfaces usually will
do the framing for you in hardware (either HDLC, SDLC, or BiSync) so
SLIP is redundant.
						David Bridgham