Jerry. I was just wondering why you still have dial up. Not meaning to question your choice of dial up as "non savy" as you mention above, but I question it more as why would you chose that option in 2007 when faster, easier to use and cheaper options exist with broadband from any number of providers?

I just wonder why anyone would still use it.

mes444, there are many areas of the country where one does not have a choice. Yes, in 2007, that is the case. My only choice besides very slow dialup is expensive satellite, so I did choose to go that route. There are even some places in the Western deserts where dialup is not available. So remember, not all America lives in a city or near suburb where true broadband is available.

OK. I understand. I guess living in big cities gets us spoiled and we forget about the people living out of the large metro areas.

And if that's the case for Jerry I hope he gets someone to answer his question. But there are people living where broadband is available for an affordable rate and for some reason they stick with the older technology and my response was directed to them, not those unable to get it.

Worldnet probably uses wholesale modem pool providers. If the modems you dial into have V44 capabilities then your modem if set to automatic negotiations, and the necessary string is enabling v44,, then both would probably use it.
Pretty simple - Either it works or it doesn't on a dialed connection.

You should be able to open a terminal program and query the modem to discover what protocols the connection is using while connected.

I dont remember those commands but an online search and some reading and you should find them.

I used to query my dialup modem connection all the time when I used dial up - forever trying to get the most bang. (used to do two and three modems at the same time into a proxy cache, connection teaming - before dsl became available back about a real long time ago, ten yrs more or less)

I haven't messed with dial up modem connections in quite some time other than to receive a few middle of the night fax machine quotes from Taiwan or some far away land that has dialed me as the wrong number.
Recieve them to quit the ringing and beeping every ten minutes so I can get back to sleeping.

Well, dial-up is free if you have a phone anyway.. if the ISP has local numbers and Worldnet does. On the other hand Worldnet isn't free and one reason I keep it is I make use of its Personal Web Page feature and don't like to search out who I need to notify I've changed my email address. As for choice, I'm in the country, about 5+ miles from the serving telephone office, so DSL requires a repeater, which Embarq (was Sprint) offers at $30 for the slowest DSL. AT&T hasn't seen sufficient business to do the same. I also have Patriot Media cable, a company I feel has ripped me off on T.V. rates for years, and they keep raising the rate...I think I can get Dish Network or Direct TV, but the large trees on the antenna side of the house may present a problem, I'll not cut them down. I will not give Patriot Media another "nickel" if I can help it. I think they want something over $30 for Cable access, neither strike me a cheap/inexpensive.

I will likely go DLS when AT&T gets service into this area and combines the price with the Worldnet membership cost. Until then, dial-up is fine, and I do have the broadband experience via Ethernet LAN in my old office, now retired, and in WiFi access I get in hotels and at meetings of the IEEE where I am a member, and past elected leader. Frankly, I don't see the big deal in broadband other than those times I need to download big files, which isn't often.

Working with Worldnet technical chat, I get a no on V.44, but their find a number says some nodes offer V.92 and V.44, but not clear if they come as a pair offer...in contact with Worldnet "News Groups" technical support I get a most likely and they'll check. Clearly dial-up isn't a service they give much attention to any longer.

Hi,
I might be little late to reply but got some info. here http://help.att.net/care/v92/v92_faq.htm?platform=none
Although it's not clearly mentioned if a V.92 # will do V.44 compression as well, however I am assuming it will.
Hope it helps.

Thanks for the research...I did spot the update/input. It seems that V.92 implementation usually, maybe has to, included V.44, which is nonetheless a stand alone specification. I may take a look on the ITU site to see if V.44 can be viewed alone.

I went to the ITU-T web site and downloaded V.44. While I didn't read the recommendations in detail, I can say it didn't even mention V.92. It does note V.42-bis is an earlier compression standard that V.44 betters. As this standard didn't come onto the scene until the end of 2000, the interest in data set protocols had already been greatly diminished from their "heyday".