Richard Town wrote the following to Edward Hobson, and I quote (in part):

 RT> Now that we've established that you know more about Vee dot than
 RT> you've hitherto let on, perhaps you'd like to explain where in
 RT> either V42 or V42bis does it permit V42bis to be switched off when
 RT> under V42 fallback negotiation action?

A question which demonstrates that you have no earthly idea of what it is
that you are attempting to imply.

1. Data compression _requires_ error control, it cannot and _will_ not be 
attempted if there is none. Error control is negotiated and established
_before_ data compression negotiation is even attempted. 

2. An alternate error control procedure to LAP-M is defined in V.42, and   
 procedures for yet others are provided for. The only procedures explictly
defined are LAP-M, and the equivalents of MNP service levels 2-4.

3. V.42bis _can_ be negotiated over forms of error contral other than
LAP-M, but is _not_ done so under the auspicies of an ITU-T recommendation.

4. Microcom has made freely avaialble the method by which V.42bis can be 
negotiated over MNP, but the method is _not_ part of any ITU-T
recommendation.

 RT> That's why they don't fully support CCITT agreed recommendations 
 RT> Advertising product as "fully compliant" in this regard is false 

Bull.

Regards....

Craig
aka: cford{at}ix.netcom.com

--- timEd/2 1.10+