PE> 3. I just looked at the doco for Binkley 2.60, and them said something
PE> about needing to change your modemtrans, but I didn't understand it

BG> I don't have the docs for 2.60.  Can you do a cut-and-paste of that 
BG> specifically relevant section for me please?

PE> 4. Looking at the code, it seems a "/" separates a prefix
and suffix.

BG> How do you mean?  You've lost me Paul.

I think modemtrans as both a prefix and a suffix, something to add
at the beginning, and something to add at the end, not sure though.

PE> 5. Can you get Binkley 2.60 from David Drummond and tell me if that has
PE> the same behaviour.

BG> I think I'd be more inclined to try the altered syntax, whatever it is.

Binkley 2.60 should operate the same as BTPE 4.00 in that respect, as
I said, but it would be best if you verified that for a fact, rather
than relying on what I think.

PE> 6. Can you read the Binkley 2.60 doco and tell me if you understand it.

BG> As I said, I don't have the 2.60 docs.

It would be worth FREQing BOS2_260.* and BSRC_260.* from 3:640/305.

BG> Well, a string search on the 2.60 executable shows that ModemTrans should 
BG> be accepted, so the problem is likely due to a change in syntax.  I'll 
BG> await your c&p of the modemtrans docs, and take it from there.

Modem handling
--------------

BinkleyTerm now matches modem types exactly rather than using a bitwise
AND. This allows lots more modem types, but requires that you change your
nodelist generation and config stuff (if you're using ModemTrans).

Callout to nodes with a particular modem type can be disabled using 
"ModemTrans xxx" (where xxx is the modem type) with no prefix or suffix.
This allows sharing BinkleyTerm between lines with particular modem types.
@EOT:

---