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