BG> Careful Bob, you'll have Rod and Paul calling you a USR Zealot soon! :)

Just a silly old bugger, waffling from ignorance basically.

BL> This little hoo-har of Paul's has been very instructive.

Yes, its also made very clear your tendency to waffle from ignorance too.

BL> You can nearly put a figure on how much
BL> better the USR is, compared to NetComm M34's.

Nope, you havent a hope in hell of doing that with the data currently
available. If Bill could run an M34F for a while, AND we could actually
MEASURE the Bill/Paul session to see if even the Courier/Courier data is
right, we might THEN be able to do something like that for THAT type of session

Poor old Bob.

BL> The thing we don't know, is what level of noise is in
BL> the system, but it translates to better connects anyway.

Fraid not, another massive Bob Lawrence brain fart. Yes, the noise isnt
that crucial to thruput with a fancy modern trellis protocol like V34.
Thats clear from Russ's calls to the bulldog, with phenomenal thruput,
even with very audible noise. BUT you dont KNOW that the noise 'translates'
to better connects, just that its possible to achieve very impressive
performance EVEN WHEN its present. Thats the whole point of V34.

Basically those calls have VERY impressive bandwidth figures, largely
because they are both with in spitting distance of their respective
exchanges. V34 is such a high performance protocol that in that situation
the noise isnt that important. Thats not necessarily true in another
situation where there isnt such good bandwidth available tho.

And we dont even know if a pair of M34Fs in that particular situation
would do any worse when you allow for the fact that it doesnt even
claim to support V34+ or 64 state trellis. And judging from the figures
that the begley/Paul sessions show on EVERY call, its very likely that
the Russ/bulldog calls would be just as good, 28800/28800 every time.

Corse in that case Couriers are better if you want maximum thruput,
but thats just the V34+ support etc, not your rave on about 3db etc.

BL> There is no doubt that if I were setting
BL> up a HS link, I'd use a pair of Couriers.

BG> So would I (oops, we're back into zealot mode). :)

BL> I'm impressed that your zealotry finally translated to 3dB better
BL> on a mixed conect, and 6dB better USR/USR. That's twice as good...

Waffle Bob, you dont have a SHRED of evidence for those numbers.

BG> See my latest connects? -36dBm on Rx, and STILL 26400 both ways! ROFL!

And thats to an M34F, so there goes Bobs theory about Couriers down the tubes.

BL> Yes! What happened? You must have dropped some interference or
BL> something. A level of -36dBm is only 10mV. I'd have thought you'd get
BL> 100mV of hum o a telephone line... let alone plops, squawks and peeps!

The whole POINT of a modern trellis protocol is that it can allow
for that sort of noise thats characteristic of the physical link,
particularly the stuff like hum, which is usually common mode anyway.
Once you implement them on a decent high horsepower DSP, lots of
tricky stuff is quite straightforward with stuff as specific as that.

You really havent grasped at all what modern protocols are all
about Bob. They dont just try to blast thru like the old ones do.
@EOT:

---