Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!mips!news.cs.indiana.edu!maytag!xenitec!zswamp!root
From: root@zswamp.uucp (Geoffrey Welsh)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.cbm
Subject: Re: Interfacing a Commodore 64 with a VAX/VMS
Message-ID: <7206.28053FCA@zswamp.uucp>
Date: 12 Apr 91 00:19:50 GMT
Organization: Izot's Swamp BBS (FidoNet), Kitchener, Ontario
Lines: 33


 >From: cshamis@desire.wright.edu

 >  If you have MNP on a modem, why would you even NEED a 
 >protocol, while not 
 >send directly to the modem,  (I mean the modem is allready 
 >DOING the error checking crap)??

   This is a sore point among computer theorists.  It is possible that an 
error may happen between the computer and the modem, and again at the other 
end.  Handshaking, buffer overflow, etc. could comspire to corrupt the data 
stream.

   "Not bloody likely, especially over short cables at 9600 bps or lower," say 
you.  You are, of course, correct: the chances are mighty slim... but that 
doesn't *eliminate* the possibility.

   I, for one, have operated error-correcting modems at speeds up to 38,400 
bps with no form of error correction between the computer and the modem.  It 
worked fine.

   But many people I know don't have their modems and hosts configured 
sufficiently well to depend on that.
 

--  
UUCP:     watmath!xenitec!zswamp!root | 602-66 Mooregate Crescent
Internet: root@zswamp.fidonet.org     | Kitchener, Ontario
FidoNet:  SYSOP, 1:221/171            | N2M 5E6 CANADA
Data:     (519) 742-8939              | (519) 741-9553
The mile is traversed not by a single leap, but by a procession of coherent 
steps; those who insist on making the trip in a single element will be
failing long after you and I have discovered new worlds. -- me