Path: utzoo!mnetor!tmsoft!torsqnt!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!uunet!spooky!witr
From: witr@rwwa.COM (Robert W. Withrow)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.sysv386
Subject: Re: Equinox question reply
Keywords: Telebit uucp spoofing details
Message-ID: <1991Feb17.193955.25078@rwwa.COM>
Date: 17 Feb 91 19:39:55 GMT
References: <1991Feb15.083043.11636@pegasus.com> <1991Feb15.164415.19733@rwwa.COM> <24307@netcom.COM>
Organization: R.W. Withrow Associates
Lines: 22

In article <24307@netcom.COM> gandrews@netcom.COM (Greg Andrews) writes:

>Protocol support for uucp (or kermit or x/ymodem) is available only
>in two modes: PEP and V.32/MNP.  "Direct V.32" does not have protocol support.

Everyone I talk to tells me something different on this (including
Telebit tech support!  Everyone agrees that spoofing is performed
in PEP mode, but no-one can agree on which other modes do spoofing.

>OTOH, the modem-to-DTE flow control can still have its little say.

Not when you have disabled *all* flow control (as I stated in my
post).  Depending on the modem (and I *dont* use Telebit modems),
there seems to be enough buffer space to support UUCP (with *all*
DTE-Modem flow control turned off) without lost packets, even when the
DTE-Modem data rate is greater than the Modem-Modem data rate.  This
is a purely empiracle estimate on my part thought...

-- 
---
 Robert Withrow, R.W. Withrow Associates, Swampscott MA 01907 USA
 Tel: +1 617 598 4480, Fax: +1 617 598 4430, Uucp: witr@rwwa.COM