1998-02-20 - Re: bugged?

Header Data

From: Bill Stewart <bill.stewart@pobox.com>
To: Alan Olsen <jkwilli2@unity.ncsu.edu>
Message Hash: a56134e2d562b117e76416c1f0ca92b131899a7c70b1fbf013d1525b464df2de
Message ID: <3.0.5.32.19980219181444.0087fd60@popd.ix.netcom.com>
Reply To: <Pine.SOL.3.96.980216061644.7638A-100000@c00953-100lez.eos. ncsu.edu>
UTC Datetime: 1998-02-20 22:10:21 UTC
Raw Date: Sat, 21 Feb 1998 06:10:21 +0800

Raw message

From: Bill Stewart <bill.stewart@pobox.com>
Date: Sat, 21 Feb 1998 06:10:21 +0800
To: Alan Olsen <jkwilli2@unity.ncsu.edu>
Subject: Re: bugged?
In-Reply-To: <Pine.SOL.3.96.980216061644.7638A-100000@c00953-100lez.eos. ncsu.edu>
Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.19980219181444.0087fd60@popd.ix.netcom.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



>Sounds like he has a 56k modem and his ISP just upgraded to the same sort
>of 56k modem he has.  That is part of the protocol negotiation.  (In the
>future, it will take 30 minutes to finish connecting with a modem, but we
>will all get 666k transmission speed over normal phone lines.)

Yeah.  Credit-card verification terminals and similar devices are typically
locked into some low speed, 300 baud or 1200 or rarely 2400,
because they don't have many characters to send in a standard transaction,
and the slow speeds have a much faster setup/training time, especially
when they don't have to adaptively negotiate a connection speed.
				Thanks! 
					Bill
Bill Stewart, bill.stewart@pobox.com
PGP Fingerprint D454 E202 CBC8 40BF  3C85 B884 0ABE 4639






Thread