Re: TELNET question
Philippe-Andre Prindeville <philipp@res.enst.fr> Thu, 17 November 1994 17:45 UTC
Received: from ietf.nri.reston.va.us by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa06682; 17 Nov 94 12:45 EST
Received: from CNRI.Reston.VA.US by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa06675; 17 Nov 94 12:45 EST
Received: from timbuk.cray.com by CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa11030; 17 Nov 94 12:45 EST
Received: from sdiv.cray.com (daemon@ironwood.cray.com [128.162.21.36]) by timbuk.cray.com (8.6.9/8.6.9M) with SMTP id LAA19196; Thu, 17 Nov 1994 11:34:50 -0600
Received: by sdiv.cray.com (5.0/CRI-5.15.b.orgabbr Sdiv) id AA00716; Thu, 17 Nov 1994 11:34:45 -0600
Received: from timbuk.cray.com by sdiv.cray.com (5.0/CRI-5.15.b.orgabbr Sdiv) id AA00711; Thu, 17 Nov 1994 11:34:44 -0600
Received: from enst.enst.fr ([XxpywoPRdcP9hOkJAe4NA8rBGmOi+Nbz]@enst.enst.fr [137.194.2.16]) by timbuk.cray.com (8.6.9/8.6.9M) with ESMTP id LAA19157 for <telnet-ietf@cray.com>; Thu, 17 Nov 1994 11:34:24 -0600
Received: from jones.res.enst.fr (jones.res.enst.fr [137.194.192.21]) by enst.enst.fr (8.6.9/8.6.9) with SMTP id SAA00619; Thu, 17 Nov 1994 18:31:17 +0100
Received: from dameron.res.enst.fr by jones.res.enst.fr with SMTP (1.37.109.4/16.2) id AA22004; Thu, 17 Nov 94 18:29:50 +0100
Received: by dameron.res.enst.fr (1.37.109.4/16.2) id AA15854; Thu, 17 Nov 94 18:29:50 +0100
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 1994 18:29:50 +0100
Sender: ietf-archive-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US
From: Philippe-Andre Prindeville <philipp@res.enst.fr>
Message-Id: <9411171829.ZM15852@dameron.res.enst.fr>
In-Reply-To: lee@huachuca-jitcosi.army.mil (Lee Chastain) "Re: TELNET question" (Nov 17, 9:38)
References: <9411171638.AA04606@huachuca-jitcosi.army.mil>
X-Address: E.N.S.T. - Dept. Res. / 46, rue Barrault / 75634 Paris Cedex 13 Tel +33(1) 45.81.73.14 Fax +33(1) 44.16.70.20
X-Face: >4WM/$ED&E'4zy#c4]"b5^50kZ9W\o}W+e>qU0!; ~b|q/.dFb}M4JKOu_gIL[`Zb!=\(t<$ ZoARNta[Qx:";t-A0-l$=tBB=bPzZpsUnUQ*8ZPHUV<GA1eqB<H~4]}+[v|G1M<2j9Dr+u} po*F``aQzl"_rtwP5l`GKH}aHuh4=%U/JGO.HeYDoR.#?+iS0{'iglw`6|4T[rWVz*=0i(
X-Mailer: Z-Mail (3.0.1 23feb94)
To: Lee Chastain <lee@huachuca-jitcosi.army.mil>, billw@cisco.com
Subject: Re: TELNET question
Cc: iptp@huachuca-jitcosi.army.mil, telnet-ietf@cray.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Length: 383
A network end-of-line *is* \r\n and not simply '\n'. This is convention. It's the same for SMTP, it's the same for FTP, NNTP, and probably HTTP as well. The default behaviour should be to do the right thing on any telnet user. We've already seen bogus implementations in UNIX telnet. These have been fixed, rather than redefining the norm. Which is as it should be... -Philip
- TELNET question Lee Chastain
- Re: TELNET question William Chops Westfield
- Re: TELNET question Theodore Ts'o
- Re: TELNET question Lee Chastain
- Re: TELNET question Philippe-Andre Prindeville
- Re: TELNET question William Chops Westfield
- Re: TELNET question Theodore Ts'o
- Re: TELNET question braden
- Re: TELNET question Theodore Ts'o