On Feb 25, 1996 at 09:53, Bill Grimsley of 3:640/305.9 wrote:

 BG>> Why &K9 (supposedly "failsafe" XON/XOFF _and_
CTS/RTS flow control) ?
[...]
 BG> Looks much the same as the M5 series too.

Gawd, now you're going way back .. no, I *don't* have one of those lurking
around to check!  :-)  But yeah, I think I probably would have used &K3
with the old M5, too.  I definitely used &K3 with the M7F, and have
left &K9 well enough alone on the M34F and it seems to be working.

 BG> Strange, as many people in the NetComm_Support echo actually stated that
 BG> &K3 was far more reliable than the default &K9.

I may change it in future - but for now, it works so I'm not messing with it.

 BG> Can't speak from personal experience here though.

Wonder why?  ;-)

 db>> I thought he was using &K3?  Maybe Paul should try &K9 after all.
 BG> Dunno, I thought he was using the default &K9 myself.

I saw some list of settings Paul posted and it had &K3 in there.  Who
knows what the hell is going on .. a Spirit Viper now, he says.

Cheers..

    - dave
    d.begley{at}ieee.org

---