IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Fwd: Re: draft-ietf-tn3270e-luname-print-02.txt

Roger Fajman <RAF@cu.nih.gov> Thu, 24 February 1994 22:50 UTC

Received: from ietf.nri.reston.va.us by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa14393; 24 Feb 94 17:50 EST
Received: from CNRI.RESTON.VA.US by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa14389; 24 Feb 94 17:50 EST
Received: from list.nih.gov by CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa21218; 24 Feb 94 17:50 EST
Received: from LIST.NIH.GOV by LIST.NIH.GOV (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 4254; Thu, 24 Feb 94 17:47:34 EST
Received: from LIST.NIH.GOV by LIST.NIH.GOV (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 4252; Thu, 24 Feb 94 17:47:17 EST
Date: Thu, 24 Feb 1994 17:46:43 -0500
Reply-To: IETF TN3270E Working Group List <TN3270E@list.nih.gov>
X-Orig-Sender: IETF TN3270E Working Group List <TN3270E@list.nih.gov>
Sender: ietf-archive-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US
From: Roger Fajman <RAF@cu.nih.gov>
Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: draft-ietf-tn3270e-luname-print-02.txt
X-To: TN3270E@LIST.NIH.GOV
To: Multiple recipients of list TN3270E <TN3270E@list.nih.gov>
Message-ID: <9402241750.aa21218@CNRI.Reston.VA.US>

> Well there are several clients and servers available now that implement
> LUNAMES and TN3270 print.  It will likely take some time to get the
> RFCS implemented and tested.  Thus for some time people may want to
> implement this protocol.

Yes, so the statement that it isn't current practice is not correct.
It's just a current practice that's not as widespread as TN3270 itself.
Although, aren't there a few things in the current draft of RFCE that
are not in current implementations?

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email