Ascend Archive
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: (ASCEND) Am I the only one ??
Are the optional symbol rates implemented in the Rockwell code for the
Maxen? Will they allow them to be negotiated by a calling modem?
At 10:41 AM 9/29/98 -0700, Kevin A Smith wrote:
>At 06:10 AM 9/29/98 , Jim Howard wrote:
>>At 09:32 1998/09/29 +1100, Neale Banks wrote:
>>>It's a minor point and presumably quite separate from the original question
>>>of why we see so much 28.8k (as distinct from <28.8k) on the back-channel
>>>and never >28.8k. In fairness, I've just now found one session running
>>>44k/24k - but it is the first I've seen at <28.8k and if line quality were
>>>an issue then surely we'd be seeing a significant number <28.8k?
>>
>>In testing with the 6.0 beta releases I had V.90/K56flex disabled
>>and dialed in with several V.90, K56flex, and V.34 modems.
>>I found that several of them would get 33.6/33.6 or 33.6/31.2,
>>but once I turned the 56k protocols back on, the upstream (back channel)
>>on all of them was either 28.8 or 26.4...
>
>As Matt pointed out, this is as expected. With K56Flex connections, the
>symbol rates supported for the upstream direction allowed upto 33.6
>connect rates - but the code was developed to be less aggressive with
>respect to attaining these rates due to potential issues with interference
>to the downstream. With V.90, the symbol rates that support 31200 and 33600
>are optional and *apparently* none of the V.90 vendors have implemented
>them (partly citing the same reasons).
>
>
>Kevin Smith (kevin@ascend.com)
>Ascend Communications...
"> ...where Network Solutions never work." /JB
++ Ascend Users Mailing List ++
To unsubscribe: send unsubscribe to ascend-users-request@bungi.com
To get FAQ'd: <http://www.nealis.net/ascend/faq>
Follow-Ups:
References: