Re: Newly revised standards-track RFC (EOR/IAC)

[Eddie Renoux <[e-mail]>]

Proposed by David:
>    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, [e-mail]
I disagree that processing immediatly is tha same as processing TELNET
sequences before the TN3270 data.  If a SYS-REQ is rec'd in the middle
of PLU-SLU data then the rest of the TN3270 data is invalid thus all TN3270
data following the SYS-REQ would be rejected and all TN3270 data preceeding
the SYS-REQ would be sent to the host.  This seems bad to me -- I cannot
see how to reject half of a message.  I cannot see how the preceeding data
can be recalled from the host if it has already been sent.  I feel the
only practical solution is to process the TELNET sequences after the EOR
(but I would really rather see them banned outright).  Any loopholes in
the protocol are bad and will eventually cause problems.
Eddie Renoux   [e-mail]