Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!uunet!europa.asd.contel.com!seka.scc.com!enger
From: enger@seka.scc.com (Robert M. Enger)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: SUCCESSFULL V.32 Implementations ??
Keywords: rockwell V.32
Message-ID: <1991Jan13.181514.30389@europa.asd.contel.com>
Date: 13 Jan 91 23:15:14 GMT
Reply-To: enger@seka.scc.com
Organization: CONTEL Federal Systems
Lines: 27
Nntp-Posting-Host: seka.scc.com

In reviewing the material posted to this discussion group it appears
that a substantial problem exists with those V.32 implementations which
rely on the Rockwell chipset.  I also notice a substantial number of postings
to this group with subject lines containing "trouble connecting with V.32"...

Does anyone have any pleasant comments on the V.32 implementation they use?
IS there ANY V.32 implementation that is TRULY resistant to bad phone lines??

We are considering purchasing new modems, primarily for interactive use.
Thus, PEP and HST don't seem to be appropriate.  

Features that would seem to be desirable are:
	o modem holds RS232 speed constant (performs internal speed adjustment)
	o provisioning of the 'lesser' speeds  (300, 1200, 2400)
	o All the error/compression stuff (V.42, V.42bis, old MNP5, etc)
	o Upgrade path to V.32bis (fast retrain, auto fall-back/forward, etc)
	o IMMUNITY to phone line degredation (both real world and bench tests!)


I don't believe the data sheets from the vendors are reliable,
and the test procedures of the trade rags have been criticized lately.
It would seem that my best source of reliable information is this group.

I would appreciate any suggestions, comments. etc.
Many thanks for taking the time to read through this,
Bob Enger
enger@seka.scc.com