Re: Newly revised standards-track RFC

"David A. Borman" <dab@berserkly.cray.com> Thu, 07 April 1994 17:03 UTC

Received: from ietf.nri.reston.va.us by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa08927; 7 Apr 94 13:03 EDT
Received: from CNRI.RESTON.VA.US by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa08923; 7 Apr 94 13:03 EDT
Received: from list.nih.gov by CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa18551; 7 Apr 94 13:03 EDT
Received: from LIST.NIH.GOV by LIST.NIH.GOV (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 6885; Thu, 07 Apr 94 13:01:50 EDT
Received: from LIST.NIH.GOV by LIST.NIH.GOV (Mailer R2.10 ptf000) with BSMTP id 6883; Thu, 07 Apr 94 12:05:53 EDT
Date: Thu, 7 Apr 1994 11:05:18 CDT
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: "David A. Borman" <dab@berserkly.cray.com>
Subject: Re: Newly revised standards-track RFC
X-To: TN3270E@LIST.NIH.GOV
To: Multiple recipients of list TN3270E <TN3270E@list.nih.gov>
Message-ID: <9404071303.aa18551@CNRI.Reston.VA.US>

Ok, Telnet commands within a TN3270E data message must be processed,
but they may be processed either before or after the TN3270E data
message that contains them (implementation dependent).  So I propose
changing the paragraph:

   The presence of Telnet commands within a TN3270E data message
   (i.e., between the header and the trailing IAC EOR) is not
   supported; neither clients nor servers should send such data.  If a
   TN3270E data message containing an IAC-command sequence (other than
   IAC IAC) is received, the receiver should discard the IAC-command
   sequence and continue processing the TN3270E data message.
   IAC-commands should be sent between TN3270E data messages, with no
   header and no trailing IAC EOR.

to:

   Telnet commands (other than IAC IAC) should be sent between
   TN3270E data messages, with no header and no trailing IAC EOR.  If
   a TN3270E data message containing an IAC-command sequence (other
   than IAC IAC) is received, it is implementation dependent when the
   IAC-command sequence will be processed, but it must be processed.
   The receiver may process it immediatly, which in effect causes it
   to processed as if it had been received before the current TN3270E
   data message, or the processing may be defered until after the
   current TN3270E data message has been processed.  It is because of
   this ambiguity that the presence of Telnet commands within a TN3270E
   data message (i.e., between the header and the trailing IAC EOR) is
   not recommended; neither clients nor servers should send such data.

                        -David Borman, dab@cray.com