Re: WantWEB/Linux/IP Masquerading
On Tue, Sep 09, 1997 at 10:08:38AM -0400, Pete Templin wrote:
> On a different angle, what about the FCC rules which essentially limit 56k
> modems to 51 or 53k? I know practically nothing about it, except that I
> read it somewhere in Network World, I believe. Back when I was a student
> and took a class on Communication and Information Systems, we derived that
> the theoretical maximum bandwidth of a phone line was really about 34kbps,
> so it doesn't surprise me that there are all of these restrictions on 56k
> modems.
And the comms classes I take now still say the same. However, as I understand
it, the x2/K56Flex crowd view the line as essentially digital with
an analog impairment on the end (the end user's local loop); that's
why the source must be digital. It depends on knowledge of the
quantisation process, etc. If my understanding is correct,
this should mean that x2 and K56Flex would need special adaptation
to the quantisation scheme; the US uses ulaw (mu-law), while
Australia and others use Alaw.
Hamish
--
Hamish Moffatt, StudIEAust hamish@debian.org, hmoffatt@mail.com
Student, computer science & computer systems engineering. 3rd year, RMIT.
http://hamish.home.ml.org/ (PGP key here) CPOM: [***** ] 53%
The opposite of a profound truth may well be another profound truth. --Bohr
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-user-request@lists.debian.org .
Trouble? e-mail to templin@bucknell.edu .
Reply to: