Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!apple!voder!pyramid!lstowell
From: lstowell@pyrnova.pyramid.com (Lon Stowell)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Re: Prior work
Message-ID: <155685@pyramid.pyramid.com>
Date: 16 May 91 19:00:31 GMT
Sender: daemon@pyramid.pyramid.com
Reply-To: lstowell@pyrnova.pyramid.com (Lon Stowell)
Organization: Pyramid Technology Corp., Mountain View, CA
Lines: 28

>In article <1991May15.194658.17376@qualcomm.com> rdippold@cancun.qualcomm.com (Ron Dippold) writes:

     <hopefully I haven't mis-attributed this....>

>> For those looking for prior work in the Hayes case, this comes from 
>> comp.dcom.telecom:
>> 
>> > The patent upheld is on the method of notifying the DCE equipment that
>> > the next data arriving should be treated as a command to the DCE, as
>> > opposed to data to be transmitted to the far end; that is, switching
>> > to command mode.
>> 
>> You mean kinda like one tells an X.25 PAD (i.e. Telenet et al.) to drop to
>> command mode from data mode,
>> 
>>    <pause> "@" <cr> <pause>
>> 
>> Seeing as the above and similar uses have been in use since the '70s,
>> how did our friends from Norcross manage to patent it?

    The use of a character to do a "PAD recall using a
    character" does NOT define a requirement for a guard timer
    around the selected character...and quite a few PAD's will
    enter command mode upon detecting ^P (mandatory value) or 
    another defined "optional" value in a continuous datastream.

    They might LEAVE command mode immediately if configured to
    do so....