david, at 20:16 on May 22 1996, you wrote to Bill Grimsley...

db> Two words: staff turn-over.

BG> I have another two words, but I'm far too polite to mention them.

db> Think about it for a second - say NetComm's tech staff *do* know what 
db> they're doing, and start implementing the company's first V.32bis/V.42bis 
db> modems, but for whatever reason leave before the job's done.

Sacked for incompetence, more likely.  :)

db> Managers don't know shit, so they just get in anyone else to finish the 
db> job.  Result?  V.42bis running over MNP Class 4 instead of LAP-M.

That's why we had the old CCITT recommendations, although I must admit that
the use of BTLZ over MNP4 (instead of MNP5) was indeed stated as being
optional, although the fact that EVERY other modem in the WORLD just
happened to do it the right way seemed to be irrelevant as far as NetComm
was concerned.

db> (BTW, NetComm's documentation reckons that V.42bis/MNP4 is faster than 
db> V.42bis/LAP-M anyway...)

Of course it is.  4X compression ratio, and MNP4's larger 256-byte frames
(although USR's LAPM uses 256-bytes as well now).  Looks great on paper,
but it's just a pity that you could only do this between two identical
series 3 NetComms.  Shame about all the other brands where it doesn't work
at all...

db>> Besides, I know one of the guys who used to write the controller code
db>> for NetComm modems...

BG> Is he the cretin who was responsible for the monumental Series 3 fuck-up
BG> where they attempted to negotiate BTLZ over MNP4, by any chance?  :)

db> Wouldn't surprise me in the slightest since he was still working there at 
db> the time - that's just the sort of joke he'd try to pull, too.  :-)

And Paul saw fit to buy a modem from these morons?  Bloody hell.

Regards, Bill

--- Msgedsq/2 3.20