BL> It is also clear that the USR negotiates quicker, makes up its mind
BL> sooner, and is more likely to settle for a lower speed rather than
BL> drop carrier on a weak line. It then retrains up if it was wrong.
BL> Netcomm just drops carrier. It is fussier about a good link.

PE> The Netcomm doesn't drop carrier, it is reporting a
PE> connect without EC, in the case of Bill calling in.

BL> I read it wrong. In any case, it is clear that NetComm has
BL> problems getting it's negotiation phase right, on weak lines.
BL> It's impossilbe to say much more, when you do not have a clue
BL> how much noise in on the line,. All we have is the levels.

Poor old Bob, talk about mindlessly raving on in his dotage.

I now know how Bob Hawke felt when he said 'silly old bugger' |-)

PE> In the case of Dieter calling in, it fails to get a
PE> connect at all, but it certainly isn't because it isn't
PE> a good link. Changing modems on Dieter's end proved that.

BL> I think it may have proved that there was
BL> something seriously wrong with Dieter's modem.

Possibly.

BL> Which was always obvious.

Easy to say after its died Bob, funny you didnt before it did tho.

BL> The sad part is that you honestly think
BL> you are using a scientific approach.

The even sadder part is that you think it makes the slightest
sense to be pontificating on the detail when even admitting
you know sweet fuck all about how modern trellis modems work.

And if you really are again just deliberately playing silly buggers,
giggling away like senile eejut, thats even more of a graphic comment.
@EOT:

---