Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!peregrine!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!usc!pollux.usc.edu!kjh
From: kjh@pollux.usc.edu (Kenneth J. Hendrickson)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Re: Practical Peripherals Tech Support
Message-ID: <28644@usc>
Date: 5 Dec 90 23:55:22 GMT
References: <28617@usc> <77@mixcom.UUCP>
Sender: news@usc
Organization: EE-Systems, USC, Los Angeles
Lines: 28
Nntp-Posting-Host: pollux.usc.edu

In article <77@mixcom.UUCP> sysop@mixcom.UUCP (System Operator) writes:
>I'm using the PP 9600 for dial-in service.  It will hold a connection
>with some non-error correcting modems.  Some.  Others it
>connects and then hangs up the phone line.
>
>The PP 9600 will not even accept a call from a PP 2400!
>(connect-hangup-connect-hangup-connect-hangup etc.)

This is exactly the problem that I am having.  I can't connect to 2400
baud modems.  However, the PM 9600 SA is the originating modem.

>The PP 9600 seems to work O.K. at 9600 V.42bis.  So, if 
>that is your only use, it may be O.K.

Mine works ok at 9600 bps also.  However, this is NOT enough.  Since
there are many 1200 & 2400 bps modems still out there, and they are
likely to remain for some time, the new 9600 bps modem that I acquire
MUST also be able to support the slower speeds.  V.32, V.22bis, V.22,
and Bell 212A must all be supported reasonably well.  I don't think I
care about Bell 103, because the 300 bps modems should have all
disappeared by now.

I have now flip-flop-flipped back again, and I think I will seek another
brand.  I am willing to pay a lot more for a modem that actually works.

-- 
favourite oxymorons:   student athlete, military justice, mercy killing
Ken Hendrickson N8DGN/6       kjh@usc.edu      ...!uunet!usc!pollux!kjh