From zentara@mindspring.com Thu Apr 2 18:38:28 1998 From: zentara@mindspring.com To: users@lists.opensuse.org Subject: [S.u.S.E. Linux] connecting 2 machines via modems with no phone Date: Thu, 02 Apr 1998 13:38:28 -0500 Message-ID: <3523DB24.CC8A5142@mindspring.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============2182777872046862990==" --===============2182777872046862990== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi, I want to do some testing of mgetty. I remember at one time there was a way of getting 2 modems to connect, without a phone line; that is, with just a phone wire between the 2 modems. You set ATX0 for blind dialing on the originator, then ATDT. On the receiver, you went offhook with ATH1, then an ATA to answer. When I did this under dos, they would connect. This dosn't seem to work under minicom. Has anyone heard of someone testing this way? And what a good procedure would be? zentara -- To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo@suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e --===============2182777872046862990==-- From gecko@freecar.com Thu Apr 2 21:38:05 1998 From: gecko@freecar.com To: users@lists.opensuse.org Subject: RE: [S.u.S.E. Linux] connecting 2 machines via modems with no ph Date: Thu, 02 Apr 1998 13:38:05 -0800 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <3523DB24.CC8A5142@mindspring.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============6217261548377602193==" --===============6217261548377602193== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 02-Apr-98 zentara wrote: >You set ATX0 for blind dialing on the originator, >then ATDT. >On the receiver, you went offhook with ATH1, then >an ATA to answer. > I did ATO from one and ATA on the other... nothing else.. not ATX0 or ATH1=20 infact, I think ATH1 would defeat the ATA It worked for me 5 minutes ago when I tested it. ---------------------------------- http://homepages.skylink.net/~gec= ko/index.html> -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- Version: 3.1 GCS d+(-) s:+ a29 C++$ UL++>++++ P+++$ L++>++++ E? W+++$ N+(-) o? K- w+++$(--) O M-- V- PS-- PE++ Y++ PGP++ t+ 5 X R+ !tv b++++ DI+++ D++ G++>G+++ e h+ r* y+ ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------ ---------------------------------- -- To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo@suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e --===============6217261548377602193==-- From zentara@mindspring.com Fri Apr 3 16:11:38 1998 From: zentara@mindspring.com To: users@lists.opensuse.org Subject: Re: [S.u.S.E. Linux] connecting 2 machines via modems with no ph Date: Fri, 03 Apr 1998 11:11:38 -0500 Message-ID: <35250A3A.FCBA3A3B@mindspring.com> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============8388387315735248804==" --===============8388387315735248804== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit gecko@freecar.com wrote: > > On 02-Apr-98 zentara wrote: > >You set ATX0 for blind dialing on the originator, > >then ATDT. > >On the receiver, you went offhook with ATH1, then > >an ATA to answer. > > > > I did ATO from one and ATA on the other... nothing else.. not ATX0 or ATH1 > infact, I think ATH1 would defeat the ATA > > It worked for me 5 minutes ago when I tested it. > Hi, I just tried it on my modems and it wouldn't work. Did you do this while both were connected to the phone system, or with a direct wire? I can get them to connect while hooked to the phone system, but an operator recording kicks in, warning me turn go back onhook. Maybe my modems don't support the AT command set fully. When you say ATO, do you mean ATO0, "O" followed by "zero"? I have to issue an ATH1 before my modems will accept an ATO0. One of my modems is a Rockwell type, and the other isn't, I wonder if that makes a difference? What kind of modems do you have? zentara -- To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo@suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e --===============8388387315735248804==--