> As regards implimentation of V42, it's worth noting that as far as
 > USR's are concerned, they only do claim that it's V42(LAPM) complient
 > not the whole hog.  P1-2 of Courier handbook refers.  However, handbooks

Are you trying to imply that USR's V.42 implementation is lacking
something? It sounds like that's what you're saying to me. Do you have any
evidence to support your theory (which is based upon your viewing of the
handbook)?

 > As far as the claims made here that V42's MNP fallback doesn't _have_ to
 > occur with V42bis...  Cobblers!  V42bis was chosen by CCITT as the

Perhaps you'd take note of Craig's message of 16-Jun-96 ("NEW
IDEA"). It seems you are mistaken in your belief that not supporting
V.42bis compression over MNP (via V.42) implies V.42 or V.42bis
non-compliance.

Edward

---