SA> V.34 on a this line I am talking about mananges a NO CARRIER, V.fc
SA> get NO CARRIER, V.Terbo gets NO CARRIER, V.32(bis) gets NO CARRIER,
SA> yeah, V.22Bis gets 2400 but HST gets 16800 and does not drop out.. :)

SA> If thats not kicking butt, I dont know what is :)

JP> The term "kicking butt" does not apply in cases where you
JP> are forced to settle for something less as an alternative.

Corse it does, the HST protocol clearly kicks butt on that particular line.

JP> Your lines must really be a nightmare.

Those other protocols are echo cancellation protocols,
so if echo cancellation is hard to do on that line, say
because the echo characteristics change rapidly, it may be
a nightmare for echo cancellation protocols but only for them.

JP> If V.32bis falls right over, and every other
JP> protocol (with the exception of HST and a flaky
JP> V.22bis does the exact same thing, you're SOL .

Nope, you get to use a protocol which isnt so
crucially dependant on successful echo cancellation.

JP> If HST will handle your line conditions flawlessly,
JP> and every other protocol fails dismally, you're not
JP> really "kicking butt", except perhaps your own.

Corse you are, you're kicking the butt of those echo cancellation protocols.

JP> 64K ISDN is what I would call "kicking butt" in comparison.

HST clearly kicks the butt of those echo cancellation protocols
very comprehensively indeed on that particular line John.
@EOT:

---