Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!yetti!geac!daveb
From: daveb@geac.UUCP
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Re: MNP modems
Message-ID: <1673@geac.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 23-Oct-87 13:56:26 EST
Article-I.D.: geac.1673
Posted: Fri Oct 23 13:56:26 1987
Date-Received: Sun, 25-Oct-87 10:45:55 EST
References: <3013@husc6.UUCP> <377@cogent.UUCP> <7660@steinmetz.steinmetz.UUCP>
Reply-To: daveb@geac.UUCP (Dave Collier-Brown)
Organization: The little blue rock next to that twinkly star.
Lines: 27
Keywords: MNP quality
Summary: Quality varies with implementor.

|In article <377@cogent.UUCP> mark@cogent.UUCP writes:
||MNP as a protocol has failed to meet our needs consistently.  Due to several
||aspects of UN*X that MNP design neglects and/or conflicts with, we have never
||gotten an MNP modem to work on our UN*X box.  We went to a different protocol
||altogether for error correction and it worked right away.

In article <7660@steinmetz.steinmetz.UUCP> davidsen@crdos1.UUCP (bill davidsen) writes:
|The only problem we have had is calling systems (a) from an MNP modem,
|(b) to a system without an MNP modem, (c) with a brain dead speed detect
|which gets in a loop when the "are you MNP" message comes in. uucp will
|run alright over them, but protocols such as zmodem produce higher
|throughput. 

  The quality (behavior under unexpected conditions) of MNP
implementations varies wildly with who did the implementation.
At least one was done by two persons on this net, and tends to work
quite well with Unix and unix tools.  At least one other was done
*rather* badly by persons unknown.
  Regrettably, I do not know which manufacturers purchased which
implementation...

 --dave 
-- 
 David Collier-Brown.                 {mnetor|yetti|utgpu}!geac!daveb
 Geac Computers International Inc.,   |  Computer Science loses its
 350 Steelcase Road,Markham, Ontario, |  memory (if not its mind)
 CANADA, L3R 1B3 (416) 475-0525 x3279 |  every 6 months.