Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!seismo!rutgers!ames!ptsfa!nonvon!gilsys!mc68020
From: mc68020@gilsys.UUCP (Thomas J Keller)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Re: Fast (12KBaud) UUCP 'g' transfer rates over Voice-Grade Lines
Message-ID: <1102@gilsys.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 15-Aug-87 17:07:31 EDT
Article-I.D.: gilsys.1102
Posted: Sat Aug 15 17:07:31 1987
Date-Received: Sun, 16-Aug-87 13:05:12 EDT
References: <192@caeco.UUCP> <2849@phri.UUCP>
Organization: Consequently Computers, Santa Rosa, Ca
Lines: 20
Summary: oh really?  no handshking in RS-232 definitions?

In article <2849@phri.UUCP>, roy@phri.UUCP (Roy Smith) writes:
> In article <192@caeco.UUCP> murf@caeco.UUCP (Steve Murphy) writes:
> >               . But they're not unique in this respect, as relatively few
> > companies even know what hardware (RTS/CTS) handshake is.
> 
> 	Arghhhhh!  Maybe the reason Sun's RS-232 ports don't do RTS/CTS
> handshaking is because if they did, it wouldn't be RS-232.  As defined in the
> standard, RS-232 has no flow-control.

     That's an interesting comment, Roy.  I find it difficult to accept, as
every RS-232 interface standard document I have ever seen includes the RTS
and CTS lines as standard signals (RTS to DCE on pin 4, EIA circuit CA,
CCITT cicuit 105; CTS to DTE on pin 5, EIA cicuit CB, CCITT circuit 106).
If there is no handshaking defined, **WHAT IN THE WORLD ARE THESE LINES
DEFINED FOR**???????

-- 
Tom Keller 
VOICE  : + 1 707 575 9493
UUCP   : {ihnp4,ames,sun,amdahl,lll-crg,pyramid}!ptsfa!gilsys!mc68020