Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!wuarchive!hsdndev!rutgers!cmcl2!uupsi!jpradley!jpr
From: jpr@jpradley.jpr.com (Jean-Pierre Radley)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Re: Telebit T2500 -> TB+ UUCP spoofing problem, HELP
Keywords: uucp spoofing T2500 TELBIT
Message-ID: <1991Mar10.014152.26911@jpradley.jpr.com>
Date: 10 Mar 91 01:41:52 GMT
References: <1991Mar4.030916.3429@bilver.uucp> <1991Mar05.051051.27651@jpradley.jpr.com> <1991Mar7.214200.20682@hq.demos.su>
Organization: NYC Public Unix
Lines: 17

In article <1991Mar7.214200.20682@hq.demos.su> dvv@hq.demos.su (Dmitry V. Volodin) writes:
>In <1991Mar05.051051.27651@jpradley.jpr.com> jpr@jpradley.jpr.com (Jean-Pierre Radley) writes:
>
>>Whatever I do in my dialTBIT binary, or any chat script, SCO's uucico will
>>ALWAYS set:  -ctsflow -rtsflow -ixon -xoff -ixany.
>
>Better do it in uucico binary. Or use FAS.

Spasibo bolshoi, Dima, but would you have any idea which byte of SCO UNIX 3.2.2
uucico should be patched?

And can I use FAS on a multiport board (Specialix, in this case).

And how would FAS help anyways, if uucico makes its own decisions about flow
control?

 Jean-Pierre Radley   NYC Public Unix   jpr@jpradley.jpr.com   CIS: 72160,1341