(PM) V.90 bitching

Brian Elfert (brian@citilink.com)
Thu, 11 Jun 1998 12:42:35 -0500 (CDT)

I assume that the reason everyone is screaming about the V.90 delay is
because they want to support USR client modems at 56K speeds.

If you have a PM3, then when you bought it, you knew you couldn't support
USR client modems at 56K speeds. PM3s and USR client modems have been
incompatible at 56K speeds for over a year now. Why the big rush now?

If everyone has this need to support USR client modems, why didn't you
buy a USR server product? If you had done so, you could have been
supporting USR clients for over a year.

Personally, I have three Total Control racks and two PM3s so I support
both x2 and K56Flex. Adding V.90 to the Total Control racks was really
just an added bonus, as I already supported both USR and non-USR 56K
modems.

Operationally, the Total Controls are a nightmare, but they work 99% of
the time once configured. From a network standpoint, I could have a
better network if USR supported OSPF.

Once V.90 is stable on the PM3, I'm seriously thinking of junking two of
my Total Controls, and getting PM3s as replacements.

Brian

-
To unsubscribe, email 'majordomo@livingston.com' with
'unsubscribe portmaster-users' in the body of the message.
Searchable list archive: <URL:http://www.livingston.com/Tech/archive/>