Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!clyde.concordia.ca!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!uwm.edu!srcsip!nic.MR.NET!ns!logajan
From: logajan@ns.network.com (John Logajan)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.atari.st
Subject: Re: UUCP implementation?
Message-ID: <1990Mar29.193953.12904@ns.network.com>
Date: 29 Mar 90 19:39:53 GMT
References: <1990Mar26.143622.18337@pmsmam.uucp> <1311@opal.tubopal.UUCP> <1990Mar28.232857.6057@ns.network.com> <1990Mar29.143731.1207@pmsmam.uucp>
Sender: news@ns.network.com
Organization: Network Systems Corporation, Mpls., MN
Lines: 19

wwm@pmsmam.UUCP (Bill Meahan) writes:
>On the workline request (always!) the control byte seemed to be missing.

I don't know why the control byte is missing, but I am pretty sure it is
not a speed issue.  As I say, the TOS buffers incoming characters.
MailTruk merely uses a bigger buffer.  There should be more than
enough buffer room for control messages and packets.  

One thing you might want to check is to make sure MailTruk and your
modem are NOT flow controlling!   XOFF-XON should be disabled in both
your modem and MailTruk (about line #20 in MailTruk, 3rd xbios parameter
should be zero.)

Control bytes often look like xoff/xon characters, thus screwing everything
up as they are stripped off the message!

-- 
- John Logajan @ Network Systems; 7600 Boone Ave; Brooklyn Park, MN 55428
- logajan@ns.network.com, john@logajan.mn.org, 612-424-4888, Fax 424-2853