Ian, at 10:54 on Jan 06 1997, you wrote to David Drummond ...

LD>> The Courier has defined 'retrain disabled' to mean reject
LD>> remote request.

DD>> Disabled does mean not enabled doesn't it?

IS> In the case of Rockwells, it's not so binary.  Have an 
IS> anotated quote:

. . .[chomp]. . .

IS> [actually, modem will _request_ fallback, then do so if the 
IS> other end agrees.  What it doesn't mention is that the modem 
IS> will also respond to requests from the _other_ end to 
IS> fallback, but it will also respond to fallforward requests 
IS> (though it won't _initiate_ fallforward requests, differing 
IS> from %E2)]

. . .[chomp]. . .

LD>> My modem and others has defined 'retrain
LD>> disabled' to mean accept remote request but not initiate
LD>> request.

DD>> What's the point of that?

IS> Finer control, or allowing control by one end of a link, can 
IS> stop 'hunting', where the two modems are madly sending each 
IS> other fallback/forward requests, from differing perceptions 
IS> of the current line quality for a given bitrate.

LD>> Having the Courier hang up 'in disgust' seems to be quite
LD>> illogical compared to the way my modem handles it.

IS> That sounds the same or similar to the Rockwell %E0 
IS> behaviour, above, though I'm not sure that's what David 
IS> meant exactly.  This is just a terminology misunderstanding, 
IS> methinks ..

DD>> I guess the courier feels that if a retrain is necessary
DD>> and the other end can't comply, there is no point in
DD>> continuing the connection.

IS> Yes, and the Rockwell would do that too, if the Courier 
IS> refused its request, after trying 'x' retrains.  Not sure 
IS> what 'x' is, though I don't think it's externally adjustable 
IS> in the Rockwells .. is it in the Couriers?

DD>> I can't imagine why one would want to disable retrains (in
DD>> any form) anyway...

IS> As I've said a few times recently, disabling _fallforward_ 
IS> requests in some Rockwells (ie, using %E1 instead of %E2) 
IS> can and has solved problems on bad lines, especially 
IS> _really_ bad lines, which most 'slickers have never seen.

With ASL doesn't it make sense that both ends have some sort of control?

David
@EOT:

--- Msgedsq/2 3.10