Re: A Livingston default modem string is bad for a USR modem
alexm@agetech.net
Sun, 11 Aug 1996 11:10:29 -0400
Carl Oppedahl wrote:
>
> 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
Diregard the last post I see that you meant dial-out not dial-in, sorry!