Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!lll-winken!lll-lcc!ames!hao!boulder!tramp!graefe
From: graefe@tramp.Colorado.EDU (GRAESE WILLIAM S)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Re: Trailblazer vs. USR 9600 HST (&& recent USR+Hayes agreement)
Message-ID: <3654@sigi.Colorado.EDU>
Date: 31 Dec 87 01:11:09 GMT
References: <2473@killer.UUCP> <492@hscfvax.harvard.edu> <757@vixie.UUCP> <324@ontenv.UUCP>
Sender: news@sigi.Colorado.EDU
Reply-To: graefe@tramp.Colorado.EDU (GRAESE WILLIAM S)
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
Lines: 16

In article <324@ontenv.UUCP> norm@ontenv.UUCP (Norman Soley) writes:
=In article <757@vixie.UUCP>, paul@vixie.UUCP (Paul Vixie Esq) writes:
=Apparently CCITT is developing a more robust standard for 9600 baud
=Async, full duplex, error correcting modems. They looked at a number
=of proposals including Hayes's V series. What is now being proposed is
=a combination of the Hayes proposal and the British Telecom one (both
=use a Variant of LAP in their 9600 Baud modems).


I was very impressed with the TB Plus report on here a while ago regarding
stability.  It sounds extreemly impressive, and I hope they can add on
FDX.(or does it already support it- I thought it did 9600/300 combined FDX)
I would like to see that become the new standard.
!---------graefe@tramp.Colorado.EDU------------------------!   ,---.     !
! Bill       |(insert something terribly witty, humorous, )!   | _   _   !
! GraeFe, Jr.|(and inspiring in this space:               )!   `-+-' |   !
!---------{sunybcs, hao}!boulder!tramp!graefe--------------!     `---'   !