Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!husc6!mailrus!ukma!rutgers!ucla-cs!admin.cognet.ucla.edu!casey
From: casey@admin.cognet.ucla.edu (Casey Leedom)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Re: Hayes 9600 sysop offer - a sour deal.
Message-ID: <16813@shemp.CS.UCLA.EDU>
Date: 14 Oct 88 16:16:58 GMT
References: <8810081712.AA14615@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU> <1394@percival.UUCP> <16738@shemp.CS.UCLA.EDU> <2143@looking.UUCP>
Sender: news@CS.UCLA.EDU
Reply-To: casey@cs.ucla.edu (Casey Leedom)
Organization: UCLA Cognitive Science Program
Lines: 28

| From: brad@looking.UUCP (Brad Templeton)
| 
| While there are full duplex applications, I feel it is important to note
| that 95% of modem use is half duplex.  If you have fast turnaround and/or
| a slow speed reverse channel, it is much more useful to get twice the bit
| rate half duplex than a mostly wasted half bandwidth rate in full duplex.

  So modems should automatically adapt to the amount of traffic flowing
in *BOTH* directions rather than trying to enforce one model or the
other.  All you need is the ability to parameterize the hysteresis
function for odd-ball applications.  Most of the time this can be done
automatically too.  It seems to me that a modem like the Telebit which
breaks the communication channel into a large number of sub-com channels
would be perfect for this.

  Henry's follow up to my comments were as one sided as my original
message.  Half duplex is not the answer.  Full duplex via dedicated half
band width implementation is not the answer.  Full duplex via adaptive
channel bandwidth allocation is what you want.

Casey

--------
The American public wants to be lied to.  They want to be told that they
are the envy of the world.  They want to be told that things are ok.
Dukakis points at the serious problems that must be addressed and
proposes some of the hard decisions that he thinks will be necessary.
Bush tells us that everything is wonderful.  Who's ahead in the polls?