Re: A Livingston default modem string is bad for a USR modem
Carl Oppedahl (carl@oppedahl.com)
Sun, 10 Nov 1996 18:23:53 -0500
At 05:37 PM 11/10/96 EST, Joe Hartley wrote:
>> Yes, the &m5 *forces* the modem to obtain an error-correcting session, which
>> is foolish not to do in cases where you know that the modem at the other end
>> of the line is capable of error correction. If we merely did &f1 and not
>> &m5, the default is &m4 which unfortunately gives the modem permission to
>> establish non-error-correcting sessions.
>
>Unfortunately??? Most of the users of PortMasters such as ISPs have
>no control at all over what sort of modems are calling! Locking a
>modem to &m5 is a *bad* thing for them, because anyone trying to
>connect with an older modem would be denied access to the system.
>
>Modems such as the USRs are very flexible, and can adapt to whatever's
>calling. I want to take advantage of that feature, not disable it! I
>don't know how you can be so sure that you'll never get a modem calling
>in that isn't error correcting - I could never take that chance.
I am sorry but you came in part way through the thread. I was talking about
*dialout*, not *dialin*. When you are dialing out, you often know perfectly
well what sort of modem is at the other end. And if it happens to be one
that supports V.32 or MNP, the person configuring the dialout would be
foolish not to *force* the connection to be error-correcting.
---
Carl Oppedahl, Oppedahl & Larson, patent law firm
http://www.patents.com/ has hundreds of pages of answers to
frequently asked questions on patent, copyright, and trademark law