Richard Town wrote in a message to Craig Ford:
 CF> Forval, Digicom, USR were the first vendors to have V.32bis modems on
 CF> the market, and they did so _before_ the recommendation was officially
 CF> ratified. Where do you dream this stuff up at?
 RT> So, modems that follow the ratified V32bis work amongst themselves
 RT> but have a difficulty with those that followed their own
 RT> pre-ratification methods.  No dreaming necessary for working that
 RT> one out.
Hardly, Richard.  The official ratification by a UN vote is not going to 
modify the recommendation.  The UN either accepts or rejects the 
recommendation.  As for Rockwell's implementation of v.32bis, I do remember 
that ROM of the week idiocy that Rockwell inflicted on those foolish enough 
to purchase early Rockwell v.32bis chipset modems.
 > Yes, there is a bug in the Rockwell implementation of V.42.  At
 > startup, when V.42 is required to send an "EC", the Rockwell V.42
 > implementation sends an "EM".
 RT> This is extended V42 which USR has never even recognised as
 RT> existing, let alone negotiated with.  But, since you feel the need
 RT> to change the subject...
Out of curiosity, where do we find "extended V42" documented?  Can you give 
me at least the name of the ITU-T recommendation?  Or is that a Rockwell 
proprietary extension?  Can you spell hypocrisy?
Regards,
       David
--- timEd/2 1.10+
---------------