Rod, at 07:05 on Feb 28 1996, you wrote to Bill Grimsley...

BG> Given my excellent full-speed connects to most other V.34 modems, I
BG> think I can safely eliminate problems between here and my own
BG> exchange (Waterford ARE-11), and given that STD calls to FNQ,
BG> Melbourne and most parts of Sydney also work perfectly, logic
BG> dictates that the fault lies with that part of the physical path
BG> which is specific to calls to your board.

RS> It doesnt work like that anymore with the absolute vast bulk of the
RS> STD calls going via the fibre optic network between exchanges now.

Sure, but even fibre-optic has inherent line loss (attenuation), which must
be reamplified every so often.  As Melbourne is almost twice the distance
from here to Sydney, how do you explain my perfect calls to there then? 
Something is not working properly one that particular path which is used
for calls to Paul's board, otherwise all calls to NSW and Vic would be
shithouse.

RS> Essentially the call is digitised in the respective exchanges
RS> at each end of the call and is fully digital between them, so
RS> this 'physical path' stuff is no longer relevant, coz its digital.

Still subject to signal amps and shapers every so often though.

RS> The problem is very clearly just because YOUR line to YOUR exchange
RS> isnt terrific. Thats clearly visible on the stats Russ got calling you.
RS> Paul has the SAME problem, HIS line to HIS exchange isnt terrific either.

Possibly.  No easy way of telling for certain though.

RS> That means you BOTH can call system which have pretty
RS> good lines like the bulldogs and get good results.

RS> BUT, when you call each other, the COMBINATION of that degradation at
RS> EACH end of the session produces an pretty obscene result. Which the
RS> M34F really cant handle very well at all when called by a Courier.

It's a logical assumption I suppose, and may have been masked by our
respective USRs' superior ability to handle marginal line conditions, but
now that Paul is using Rockwells, the problem has become more obvious.

RS> BUT when someone like Brenton calls Pauls system, again, his line
RS> appears to be pretty reasonable, so he never sees the GROSS effect.

Again, that's logical.

BG> If your calls are routed via Sydney Edison, I have heard
BG> that it's a dreadful old exchange, and would also explain
BG> why my connects with IBM are not much better than yours.

RS> Well, that may well explain why Pauls line isnt too
RS> terrific, but its not in the inter exchange system so
RS> much as the terminal exchanges, tho you can get a complicated
RS> system called trombone trunking at the terminal exchange too.

Could explain Telstra's reluctance to guarantee anything better than 2400
BAUD (not BITS) on their lines, I guess.

RS> OTOH its clear from Dave Hatches obscene results at
RS> times that even a modern exchange can well bite too.

And if little Johhny sells Telstra, it'll likely only get worse.  :(

Regards, Bill

--- Msgedsq/2 3.20