TR> Yep, definitely sounds like a poor V32bis implementation on the Supra.

RS> You might care to try to explain why, if the Supra is at fault,
RS> why that problem is never seen when a USR Sportster V34 is called.

BG> And YOU might care to try explaining why the Supra is apparently the ONLY
BG> V.32bis modem to exhibit this peculiar behaviour when calling a Courier...

RS> We dont actually know that it is Bill, particularly
RS> when other V32bis modems have had problems with
RS> Spirit Thunders with the V32terbo mode enabled.

BG> Which "other" modems might these be then ?

The most obvious were the Maestro V32bis modems.

BG> I know that your Supra has always had problems
BG> connecting with any V.32ter-capable modem,

You dont even know that Bill, there have been just
TWO types of those tried, the Courier and the Thunder.

BG> but given that Dave has several V.32ter callers

Those prove nothing at all, those modems are clearly V32terbo capable Bill.

BG> (and hundreds of V.32bis callers) who
BG> connect with no problems whatsoever,

Yeah, yeah, heard this line before Bill. YOU claimed that the handshaking
problem you saw when calling a Spirit had never ever been seen with
anything but a Spirit. Now its seen when you call a Netcon M34F too.

You basically just plain dont know how many V32bis modems are
seeing glitches when calling V32terbo capable modems, and we KNOW
that Paul saw some with the Thunder. It wouldnt surprise me in the
slightest if the claims about no Courier ever having a problem with
V32bis callers ever under any circumstances is JUST as bogus.

Particularly when we have seen the bulldog claim that all his
callers never ever have any problem at all under any circumstances,
so what Paul sees when he uses a USR must be user error. Soorree,
what we are ACTUALLY seeing is the usual zealotry.

BG> the evidence would clearly suggest that the problem lies
BG> in the old V.32bis Supra's implementation of that protocol.

Soorree, you dont have the evidence to substantiate that, PARTICULARLY
when it never has any problem calling Sportsters and doesnt when the
V32terbo is disabled in the Courier too. When we KNOW that V32terbo
is a kludge, its hardly surprising we see some warts with the wide
variety of V32bis modems out there in the field when its introduced.

RS> Basically, V32terbo is very kludgy hack to V32bis, just fiddling with
RS> the constellation pattern, and not properly integrated into V32bis at
RS> the level of the session negotiation. Its hardly very surprising that
RS> that approach can bite with hordes of V32bis modems already in the field.

BG> But it doesn't.

I said it CAN bite, it clearly can Bill.

BG> It apparently only bites with YOUR old Supra modem.

Crap, Maestros have problem calling Thunders too. Thats why Paul
disabled V32terbo on his Thunder. In fact its quite trivial to do a
workaround when calling a Thunder with a Supra, BUT thats not very
useful at all with a BBS modem when you have no way of notifying new
callers in advance what they need to do to get an initial connect.

BG> Can't you grasp that simple fact ?  The
BG> world has moved on over the past 5 years.

Yeah, we even saw the higher speed protocols done properly with V34
Bill. Which the Supra and Maestro V32bis modems dont have any problem
calling Bill. Coz its a proper robust protocol design and not a kludge
Bill. As can clearly be seen when calling a Sporter V34 Bill. Funny that.

RS> Its also interesting that the Supra has NO problem whatever
RS> with the rather less kludgy approaches like VFC and V34. Which
RS> both happen to have the session negotiation stuff done properly.

BG> The need for decent backward compatibility is no surprise to me.

RS> Kludges can bite. Thats no news whatever.

BG> As you wish.  They sure haven't bitten me though.

Hardly very surprising that USR ensured that there was no visible glitch
when the V32terbo capable Couriers were called by Sportsters Bill.
@EOT:

---