BG> but it's clear that a USR-USR link is superior to any other
BG> combination. Nobody has ever been able to dispute that.

RS> Fraid so. If you eliminate the >28800 speeds, which the M34F doesnt
RS> even CLAIM to support, you havent been able to show that on your
RS> calls to Paul that a USR/USR pair does better than an M34F/M34F pair.

BG> Fraid so.

Fraid not.

BG> That's EXACTLY what I was able to prove once David
BG> brought his borrowed M34F around here for testing.

Fraid not. The data you have available for M34F/M34F calls between
you and Paul isnt anything like enough to substantiate that claim.

BG> While Paul had the Courier, I was seeing 28800s (with occasional 26400s,
BG> but don't forget that this was with the old Sportster ROM which
BG> couldn't even connect at all with the M34F most of the time),

These are irrelevant, we at talking about how USR/USR performs
compared with how M34F/M34F performs on calls from you to Paul.

And I notice that just before the M34F at your end, you got
all but one 28800 with the new Sportster rom and his M34F.

BG> whilst M34F-M34F was only 26400 at best from here.

I have gone back to your message after that and it doesnt
say that. Most of what you said was about the %L value
reports which we now know are completely meaningless.

Hopefully Paul will do a log extract on the speeds. You havent actually
said how many times you actually called Paul M34F/M34F either.

RS> So you havent got a SHRED of evidence that the USR/USR is better there.

BG> On my (poor) lines, USR-USR is clearly better.

I'm not convinced that you actually have the evidence to substantiate that
claim unless you did make lots of M34F/M34F calls to Paul the day you had
it. You certainly didnt even say that speed detail previously, so I should
really have said that you hadnt presented a shred of evidence to substantiate
the claim that M34F/M34F does worse on calls from you to Paul than USR/USR.

I think its more likely you made to few M34F/M34F calls to say much.
@EOT:

---