Article View: mod.telecom
Article #146Vadic 3400 protocol
From: "Keith F. Lynch"
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1985 01:19
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1985 01:19
17 lines
1324 bytes
1324 bytes
Date: Tuesday, 15 October 1985 14:20-MDT
From: "William P. Malloy" <decvax!ittatc!ittral!malloy@Ucb-Vax.ARPA>
Does anyone out there have Racal Vadic VA 4224 modems installed ...
p.s. Interesting point. These suckers talk (2400/1200/300) but the
protocols supported are (V.22/212/103). Note: Vadic 3400 protocol is
not supported!
A few years ago, Vadic 3400 and Bell 212 were equally popular. For a
while it looked like Vadic 3400 was pulling ahead. But now, it seems to
be one with the dinosaurs.
This is unfortunate, since Vadic 3400 was a better protocol. Does anyone
know why Bell 212 came out ahead? Restrictive licensing by Vadic, perhaps?
...Keith
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<[MIT-MC.ARPA].687623.851021.KFL>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!decvax!decwrl!ucbvax!mit-mc.arpa!KFLShow Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 4.3bsd-beta 6/6/85; site ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!decvax!decwrl!ucbvax!mit-mc.arpa!KFL
From: KFL@MIT-MC.ARPA ("Keith F. Lynch")
Newsgroups: mod.telecom
Subject: Vadic 3400 protocol
Message-ID: <[MIT-MC.ARPA].687623.851021.KFL>
Date: Mon, 21-Oct-85 21:19:21 EDT
Article-I.D.: <[MIT-MC.ARPA].687623.851021.KFL>
Posted: Mon Oct 21 21:19:21 1985
Date-Received: Wed, 23-Oct-85 13:19:33 EDT
Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Organization: The ARPA Internet
Lines: 17
Approved: telecom@ucb-vax.arpa