Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!virtech!cpcahil
From: cpcahil@virtech.uucp (Conor P. Cahill)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Re: Any REAL advantage of Trailblazer V.32 over MultiTech V.32?
Message-ID: <1990Oct30.135744.24974@virtech.uucp>
Date: 30 Oct 90 13:57:44 GMT
References: <298@twg.bc.ca>
Reply-To: cpcahil@virtech.UUCP (Conor P. Cahill)
Organization: Virtual Technologies Inc., Sterling VA
Lines: 26

In article <298@twg.bc.ca> bill@twg.bc.ca (Bill Irwin) writes:
>is  simply,  will this modem talk to the Trailblazers that seem to be  so
>popular  with uucp sites at 9600, or does the TB use a proprietary method
>of establishing the 9600 connection?

The reason TBs are uses so extensively in the UNIX market is that they
have thier own PEP protocol (14xxx bps half duplex) and they spoof the
uucp protocol.  This results in very fast uucp transfers.

PEP is not compatible with V.32. 

The drawback to PEP is that it is unsatisfactory for interactive sessions.

We have a couple of T2500s (along with six Microcom V.32 modems) and use them 
in PEP mode for uucp sessions and V.32 mode for interactive sessions.

Another good point for PEP is that the protocol is much more resistant to
line problems than V.32.  On some of our interactive connections, the
V.32 protocol give up quite frequently and I usually end up falling back
to PEP, which has been 100% reliable over the same connection, even though
the chopiness of PEP bothers us.

-- 
Conor P. Cahill            (703)430-9247        Virtual Technologies, Inc.,
uunet!virtech!cpcahil                           46030 Manekin Plaza, Suite 160
                                                Sterling, VA 22170