| |
PA2AGA > TCPDIG 28.11.96 04:25l 168 Lines 5564 Bytes #-10807 (0) @ EU
BID : TCP_96_249A
Read: DG7DAH GUEST
Subj: TCP-Group Digest 96/249A
Path: DB0AAB<DB0PV<DB0MAK<DB0BOX<DB0FP<DB0SRS<DB0ZDF<DB0HOM<LX0PAC<ON7RC<
ON1BWP<ON6AR<PI8HWB<PI8VAD<PI8VNW
Sent: 961127/2259Z @:PI8VNW.#ZH2.NLD.EU #:47078 [Hoek v Holland] FBB5.15c
From: PA2AGA@PI8VNW.#ZH2.NLD.EU
To : TCPDIG@EU
Received: from pa2aga by pi1hvh with SMTP
id AA21552 ; Wed, 27 Nov 96 22:41:49 UTC
Received: from pa2aga by pa2aga (NET/Mac 2.3.62/7.1) with SMTP
id AA00000264 ; Wed, 27 Nov 96 23:26:47 MET
Received: from pa2aga-1 by pa2aga with SMTP
id AA00000258 ; Wed, 27 Nov 96 23:24:21 MET
Received: from pa2aga-1 by pa2aga-1 (NET/Mac 2.3.62/7.5.5) with SMTP
id AA00008615 ; Wed, 27 Nov 96 23:24:20 MET
Date: Wed, 27 Nov 96 23:19:23 MET
Message-Id: <tcp_96_249A>
From: pa2aga
To: tcp_broadcast@pa2aga-1
Subject: TCP-Group Digest 96/249A
X-BBS-Msg-Type: B
TCP-Group Digest Tue, 26 Nov 96 Volume 96 : Issue 249
Today's Topics:
??? ethrax25 ??? How ? (4 msgs)
AEA up for sale; customer service closed (2 msgs)
Send Replies or notes for publication to: <TCP-Group@UCSD.Edu>.
Subscription requests to <TCP-Group-REQUEST@UCSD.Edu>.
Problems you can't solve otherwise to brian@ucsd.edu.
Archives of past issues of the TCP-Group Digest are available
(by FTP only) from ftp.UCSD.Edu in directory "mailarchives".
We trust that readers are intelligent enough to realize that all text
herein consists of personal comments and does not represent the official
policies or positions of any party. Your mileage may vary. So there.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 1996 05:50:24 -0600
From: "Steve Sampson" <ssampson@oklahoma.net>
Subject: ??? ethrax25 ??? How ?
> "Portmapper" is something entirely different, used for RPC negotiation.
What
> you are thinking of is "IP masquerading."
That's fine.
I didn't mean to use any copyrighted, or trade-marked terms.
What's so bad about English, is that 60% of the words are owned by
American capitalists :-)
Steve
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 1996 14:01:53 -0500
From: Jim De Arras <jmd@cube.WestLab.com>
Subject: ??? ethrax25 ??? How ?
Steve Sampson wrote:
>
> > "Portmapper" is something entirely different, used for RPC negotiation.
> What
> > you are thinking of is "IP masquerading."
>
> That's fine.
>
> I didn't mean to use any copyrighted, or trade-marked terms.
> What's so bad about English, is that 60% of the words are owned by
> American capitalists :-)
>
> Steve
That's American(tm) capitalists(tm) to you! :-)
Jim
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 96 15:31:00 -0000
From: mikebw@bilow.bilow.uu.ids.net (Mike Bilow)
Subject: ??? ethrax25 ??? How ?
Steve Sampson wrote in a message to Mike Bilow:
> "Portmapper" is something entirely different, used for RPC negotiation.
> What you are thinking of is "IP masquerading."
SS> That's fine.
SS> I didn't mean to use any copyrighted, or trade-marked terms.
SS> What's so bad about English, is that 60% of the words are
SS> owned by American capitalists :-)
This stuff is a shorthand so us geeks can communicate in these messages with
only two or three sentences instead of whole paragraphs using thousands of
words. The term "Portmapper" is formally defined in RFC1057; I don't think it
is trademarked by anyone, although if it is the owner probably would be Sun
Microsystems.
There are several different terms used to describe slight but significant
variations on what you were talking about, where a router manipulates address
information so that multiple machines look like a single machine. Sometimes
this is done for security considerations, such as with the "SOCKS" protocol,
and other times is done primarily for economic considerations, as with "IP
masquerading." However, these terms all mean different things.
This whole issue has been somewhat controversial as a matter of Internet
design
philosophy. For example, Steve Bellovin writes in RFC1681 about a similar
concept:
I should note that the idea of encoding the service in the transport
address bears some relation to OSI's model. That similarity should
not, of course, invalidate the idea.
-- Mike
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 1996 04:10:20 GMT
From: brian@nothing.UCSD.EDU (Brian Kantor)
Subject: ??? ethrax25 ??? How ?
I wrote and distributed some patches to Karn's NOS that caused connections
to the mailbox to be translated to telnets to defined host/port combinations
with exactly this purpose in mind. I'll try to find them and make them
available if no one has them handy already.
It was only a couple of lines of code, as I recall. I think I just
jammed a telnet command into the mailbox upon connection.
- Brian
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 1996 10:03:13 -0500
From: Jim De Arras <jmd@cube.WestLab.com>
Subject: AEA up for sale; customer service closed
Charles Brabham wrote:
>
>
> That's encouraging news, Jim!
>
> Reduced availability of plug 'n play "appliances" will encourage the
> educational side of ham radio, as hams once again turn to piecing together
> their own equipment from whatever is available. Conversion of commercial
> and military equipment will be more common, and this in turn will elevate
> the quality of hams, which will make up somewhat for the reduced quantity
> of them.
I would doubt it! :-)
>
> Just joking, but then again it does point out that there's a bright side to
> every scenario. Personally I have serious reservations as to your gloomy
> predictions coming about, but if they do I think you will be amazed at how
> well hams will handle the situation.
I will be amazed IF they handle it. I've watched technology advance as
To be continued in digest: tcp_96_249B
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
