On Mar 18, 1996 at 08:57, Bill Grimsley of 3:640/305.9 wrote:

 DD>> It seems that with the "full connect info" screen
turned on, the NetComm
 DD>> does NOT return a CONNECT 28800 string which Binkley seems to be looking
 DD>> for to determine the connect.  I turned \V back to 0 and tried again.
 BG>
 BG> You're joking!  So doesn't the connect string appear on just one line
 BG> then, the same as the USR?

With \V1, it does.  With \V9, you get:

 -----[ snip, snip ]-----

Terminal      : 57600  8 data bits  No Parity
Line          : 28800  V.34
Error Correct : LAPM
Compression   : V.42bis tx/rx
Encryption    : None
Current EQM   : 022
EQM Retrain at: 098
Rx Level(-dBm): 033

CONNECT 28800/LAP-M/V.42bis/V.34

 -----[ snip, snip ]-----

You can't blame the M34F for all these dolts running around ignoring TFM? 
BTW, for those who didn't already know, the Programmer's Society at the
University of Technology, Sydney (UTS) actually *publishes* TFM!  :-)

 BG> In fact, how exactly IS it reported on the M34F?

See above - with \V1, you only get the last "CONNECT 28800..."
line at the bottom.

 BG> The on-line help screens actually detail a number of different
 BG> methods which can be used, but that's an even worse
"quirk" than the
 BG> USR's ATZ anomaly.

It's called flexibility.  You want fewer options, then what for you using a
USR, eh?  ;-)

 BG> What if you'd been doing a sched pollfeed to say somewhere
 BG> in Zone 1 or Zone 2?  Urk!

The joys of fucking with modem configs without actually checking them,
before entrusting them to unattended mode.  :-)

 BG> Bugger me!  Your Tx level is lower than your Rx level!  I bet Joe would
 BG> freak right out if you posted those stats in USR_Modems...  :)

Seriously, *do* it - we're after answers, let's see what he says.

 BG> So your EQM is once again between 17-19, and Rx signal level is -50dBm.

No it's not.  Ignore it, it's broken.  As I said some weeks ago.

Bill, you gave me the impression that you were using an M34F for a test,
too;  no, lemme guess .. just relieving yourself, eh?  :-)  If not, can you
give me the full EPROM/Rockwell version numbers please (DD, same for you
too, please - and Paul again, too) as I want to see if there are any
differences before I mention this to NetComm.

That's "ATI9#V0I6#V1".

No Paul, I haven't done it yet as I've been too busy.  :-(

    - dave
    d.begley{at}ieee.org

---