Equinox hardware flow control

[Pete Holsberg]

In article <1377 at ecicrl.ocunix.on.ca> clewis at ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis) writes:
=Trailblazers *do* need to use flow control in most UUCP situations.  One situation
=is where the modem is transmitting to "their" host, and the host can't
=quite keep up to bursts.  If the host doesn't flow control, it'll lose characters.
=This can often be bad enough to drop connections even with UUCP packetizing
=and retransmissions of packets after errors.  (eg: if, from a quiescent state,
=your host will frequently drop a character from a continuous 19200 baud input
=burst, you're toast)

This appears to be the case that runs into trouble on my system when I
use xon/xoff.  I don't use hardware handshaking because my ports
apparently don't know how, and (since dropping xon/xoff) I've had
faultless UUCP with two other Trailblazer sites, one of which provides
news at up to 20 MB/day.

So my experience is directly opposite yours, especially when I recall
that I used to use xon/xoff at 2400 bps without a hitch.  Could you
explain where I'm confused about what you're saying?

Thanks,
Pete
-- 
Prof. Peter J. Holsberg      Mercer County Community College
Voice: 609-586-4800          Engineering Technology, Computers and Math
UUCP:...!princeton!mccc!pjh  1200 Old Trenton Road, Trenton, NJ 08690
Internet: pjh at mccc.edu	     Trenton Computer Festival -- 4/20-21/91