🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <gWtJ5AAtt6O2EwUP@colskip.demon.co.uk>,
Colin Smith <colskip@colskip.demon.co.uk> wrote:

>the point I wished to make concerned Confrontation
>and the merits or lack of them in listing flaky V90 firmware in public.

It's a valid point of discussion; I can see why Demon would be reluctant to
start pointing fingers, even if it was just a factual report. And anyway,
what "facts" would they be going on?

For instance, there's the overlay of telco performance. I found the C&W
line with 3Com servers to be unacceptably flaky; I was getting up to 1 in 5
CBNLs. Is this a Courier/3Com terminal server issue? From the high
incidence of call gapping-type messages I was convinced that this was a
telco switching issue but I wasn't *sure* of that, and I had no idea which
telco (I originate from a Telewest number). The Green ROMP, also 3Com,
after one CBNL on the first day, has since proved bog reliable- as good as
the Energis ROMP or the COLT London number, both also bog reliable. But
that's at V34+; I see that others are getting nasty problems of data
slowdown on V90. Others are having a wonderful time on the same numbers.
Telcos are obviously an issue in this along with the modem types and
firmware versions. All very messy. What are Demon supposed to report?   

There's the additional point that V90 firmware is changing by the week as
manufacturers try to iron out problems; so is the terminal server firmware,
maybe not by the week, but it's far from finalised. So a report wouldn't be
valid for long, yet an "official" put-down would echo on for ever whether
or not a new firmware version eliminated the problems.

As I said, I can see why Demon might prefer to talk privately to the
manufacturers.

-- 
Peter