Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!lll-lcc!lll-tis!ptsfa!hoptoad!academ!killer!pollux!bobkat!pedz
From: pedz@bobkat.UUCP (Pedz Thing)
Newsgroups: comp.sources.d,comp.emacs
Subject: Re: 9600 baud problems (was Re: when using termcap, get it right!)
Message-ID: <1373@bobkat.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 1-Jul-87 13:45:50 EDT
Article-I.D.: bobkat.1373
Posted: Wed Jul  1 13:45:50 1987
Date-Received: Tue, 7-Jul-87 01:36:11 EDT
References: <1149@carthage.swatsun.UUCP> <8601@tekecs.TEK.COM>
Reply-To: pedz@bobkat.UUCP (Pedz Thing)
Organization: Digital Lynx, Inc; Dallas, TX
Lines: 19
Xref: mnetor comp.sources.d:945 comp.emacs:1327


One problem that no one has pointed out is that the EIA-232-D
definition does not have any hardware flow control defined.  The use
of request-to-send, clear-to-send for flow control from the computer
to the modem is mentioned although using for this puspose would not
violate the standard.  The flow control from the modem to the computer
is not specified at all.  Not to mention that flow control from one
computer to another (like a terminal) is totally out of the scope of
the specification.

There are customary ways to do hardware flow control although DEC has
a great tendency to ignore this.  In fact, all of DEC's equipment is
completely backwards and frequently does not have any capability to do
hardware flow control at all.  I guess that is to be expected.
-- 
Cute signature line employing many literary allusions and puns.
Standard disclaimer concerning my mental incompetance.
Perry Smith a.k.a. (Pedz Thing)
pedz@bobkat or {ti-csl,infotel}!pollux!bobkat!pedz