home
***
CD-ROM
|
disk
|
FTP
|
other
***
search
/
kermit.columbia.edu
/
kermit.columbia.edu.tar
/
kermit.columbia.edu
/
newsgroups
/
misc.19970929-19971216
/
000103_news@newsmaster….columbia.edu _Wed Oct 15 14:51:20 1997.msg
< prev
next >
Wrap
Internet Message Format
|
1997-12-15
|
3KB
Return-Path: <news@newsmaster.cc.columbia.edu>
Received: from newsmaster.cc.columbia.edu (newsmaster.cc.columbia.edu [128.59.35.30])
by watsun.cc.columbia.edu (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id OAA11647
for <kermit.misc@watsun.cc.columbia.edu>; Wed, 15 Oct 1997 14:51:20 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from news@localhost)
by newsmaster.cc.columbia.edu (8.8.5/8.8.5) id OAA17014
for kermit.misc@watsun; Wed, 15 Oct 1997 14:51:19 -0400 (EDT)
Path: news.columbia.edu!panix!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!news.he.net!scanner.worldgate.com!rover.ucs.ualberta.ca!alberta!not-for-mail
From: Vladimir Alexiev <vladimir@cs.ualberta.ca>
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.kermit.misc
Subject: Re: Kermit via PPP under DOS?
Date: 15 Oct 1997 12:33:41 -0600
Organization: University of Alberta, Computing Science
Lines: 26
Message-ID: <ompvp698qi.fsf@tees.cs.ualberta.ca>
References: <k1c7kBQEU5Wv@cc.usu.edu> <omvhza9x7g.fsf@tees.cs.ualberta.ca>
<5jzp7SiZjuUm@cc.usu.edu> <omn2kcqegc.fsf@tees.cs.ualberta.ca>
<uoh4sknvo.fsf@dlane.contactpt.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tees.cs.ualberta.ca
In-reply-to: dlane@contactpt.com's message of 14 Oct 1997 17:58:51 -0400
X-Newsreader: Gnus v5.0.15
Xref: news.columbia.edu comp.protocols.kermit.misc:7882
In article <uoh4sknvo.fsf@dlane.contactpt.com> dlane@contactpt.com (David Lane) writes:
> why would a PPP packet driver emulate a class 1 driver and not a class 6
> driver?
Two reasons:
- there are apps that work with class 1, but not class 6. TVDog says "many
apps are like so".
- RARP/BOOTP/DHCP are only possible with class 1.
Also, I'm not sure whether PPP packets fit better in a class 6 or a class 1
frame. (Some PPP drivers provide class 15, but as Joe D says, class 15 is not
standardized, thus mostly unusable.)
> The differences in behavior that follow from this are more significant. One
> is emulating a broadcast medium on a point-to-point connection.
A class 1 emulator with proxy ARP on the other side makes the p-p connection
look like an extension of the remote LAN.
> The other is emulating a point-to-point connection of somewhat lesser
> capabilities
Does one know what is the difference between SLIP and PPP at the packet
interface level? How bad a match is class 6 for class 15?
> On ethernet you do arp, or you're not doing it right. On PPP, you do some
> minor negotiation at connect time, but you don't do ARP per se.
A broadcast over a line that has only one other machine connected to it (the
gateway) is pretty much the same as a p-p connection, isn't it?