QRZ! Ham Radio 5/QRZ Ham Radio Callsign Database - Volume 5.iso/digests/tcp/940007.txt

Internet Message Format | 1994-11-13 | 11.7 KB

Date: Tue, 11 Jan 94 04:30:09 PST
From: Advanced Amateur Radio Networking Group <[e-mail]>
Errors-To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Precedence: Bulk
Subject: TCP-Group Digest V94 #7
To: tcp-group-digest


TCP-Group Digest            Tue, 11 Jan 94       Volume 94 : Issue    7

Today's Topics:
                           AMPR.org Domain
                       BBS landline/packet/nos
           Extended KISS and SMACK specifications? (3 msgs)
                             JNOS and BPQ
                            KISS and SLIP
                        Landline bbs / packet
                    NOS FTP drive switch (3 msgs)

Send Replies or notes for publication to: <[e-mail]>.
Subscription requests to <[e-mail]>.
Problems you can't solve otherwise to [e-mail].

Archives of past issues of the TCP-Group Digest are available
(by FTP only) from UCSD.Edu in directory "mailarchives".

We trust that readers are intelligent enough to realize that all text
herein consists of personal comments and does not represent the official
policies or positions of any party.  Your mileage may vary.  So there.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 10 Jan 1994 17:40:52 -0800
From: [e-mail] (Phil Karn)
Subject: AMPR.org Domain
To: [e-mail]

A few weeks ago, I also put some fixes into the ampr.org domain
server.  I was motivated to do it because I run my home BSD machine as
a secondary for ampr.org, and I was getting error messages on my console.

By far the most common error was having both a CNAME entry and other record
types (A, MX) for the same domain name. This is illegal. If there is
a CNAME record for a given name, there can be no other records for that
same name.

Phil

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 10 Jan 94 10:16:54 CST
From: "John Martin" <[e-mail]>
Subject: BBS landline/packet/nos
To: [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail]

We are currently running a Landline BBS, a Packet BBS and a NOS FTP/Mail
server. This is using 3 PCs. Our wish is to run all three on a single PC,
but I know this is not possible (is it??).

Does anyone know of BBS software that will support both a phone and a
packet connection simultaneously? If so, any idea of the cost?

Does anyone know how to Telnet or FTP to a NOS and then access the mail
and file systems of another PC (the BBS). Is there a NOS that allows this?
Is anyone running a BBS and a NOS on the same PC via Windows or some other
multitasking shell?

Thanks, 73 -- John

-----
John Martin, kb5ggo
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
[phone] (h)

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 10 Jan 1994 18:07:06 -0800 (PST)
From: Lyndon Nerenberg <[e-mail]>
Subject: Extended KISS and SMACK specifications?
To: Phil Karn <[e-mail]>

On Mon, 10 Jan 1994, Phil Karn wrote:

> If anything, your NFS example is more closely analogous to adding CRCs
> to KISS just so you can run bare AX.25 instead of TCP or UDP between
> your applications. Both actions are bogus if you believe in end-to-end
> integrity checks as I do.

What about ARP requests and replies?

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 10 Jan 1994 17:55:18 -0800
From: [e-mail] (Phil Karn)
Subject: Extended KISS and SMACK specifications?
To: [e-mail]

>Do you work for Sun? This sounds like their reasoning for turning off NFS
>UDP checksums: dump the error checking so we can make the benchmarks look
>better.

Wrong analogy. Turning off UDP checksums in NFS was wrong because that
removed the only end-to-end data integrity check. The Ethernet frame
level CRCs weren't enough, because they weren't end-to-end.

KISS didn't have checksums or CRCs because a) it isn't an end-to-end
protocol, and b) it was designed specifically to support TCP and UDP,
which do provide end-to-end checksums.

If anything, your NFS example is more closely analogous to adding CRCs
to KISS just so you can run bare AX.25 instead of TCP or UDP between
your applications. Both actions are bogus if you believe in end-to-end
integrity checks as I do.

Phil

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 10 Jan 1994 19:54:12 -0800
From: [e-mail] (Phil Karn)
Subject: Extended KISS and SMACK specifications?
To: [e-mail]

>What about ARP requests and replies?

Good point. ARP should have been designed with a checksum.

Phil

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 11 Jan 94 10:11:00 PST
From: Martin Lines <[e-mail]>
Subject: JNOS and BPQ
To: "'nos-bbs'" <[e-mail]>, tcp-group <[e-mail]>

I have been playing with the distribution version of JNOS110x10 which
includes the BPQ support.
I can get JNOS to see the ports through bpq as expected but I cannot get a
"switch" channel between
JNOS and BPQ to work, this would enable attached bpq users to connect to
jnos and vice-versa.


The bpqcode is approximately set up as

TNCPORT
     kiss tnc on com1
ENDPORT
TNCPORT
     kiss tnc on com2
ENDPORT
TNCPORT
     internal loopback
ENDPORT

THe jnos code is set up as:

attach bpq init 0x7f 1

attach bpq 1 vhf 256 G1SEO-5
attach bpq 2 vhf 256 G1SEO-5
attach bpq 3 switch 256 G1SEO-5


Has anyone out there achieved this.


MArtin Lines - G1SEO - [e-mail]

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 10 Jan 94 9:00:24 CST
From: Ben Thornton <[e-mail]>
Subject: KISS and SLIP
To: [e-mail] (Brian Kantor) (Brian Kantor)

> Face it guys, out here on the edge, worrying about what 'the majority'
> wants or isn't too scared to do is a pitiful waste of your time.

Agreed.  Let's not hinder progress toward getting the most out of packet.

> TCP/IP will NEVER be widely accepted by the ham radio community and
> you'd better just stop wasting your breath trying.  What's the matter?
> Feeling lonely because no one else wants to play the game?

Interestingly, TCP/IP activity in the Austin area has increased remarkably
ever since a symposium on TCP/IP was conducted by one of the local ham
clubs.  That combined with the presence of a local Internet gateway and
a usable router/digi has made TCP/IP a very popular mode here.

  --ben

--
Ben Thornton                             Amateur call: WD5HLS
Internet: [e-mail]       Motorola Inc., Austin, TX

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 10 Jan 94 14:16:58 EST
From: [e-mail] (D. Crompton)
Subject: Landline bbs / packet
To: [e-mail]



NOS (JNOS) will support a simultaneous Phone BBS connection along with it's
onther functions. I do it. You attach the serial port like it was an ax25
connection and then start tip on that interface. The user get's the NOS
bbs login and normal bbs as well as xmodem xfers if it is compiled in.

It works well. I have numerous users who get there mail that way and up/down
load info. Currently my port is 2400 baud but there is no reason why it
would not work at much higher rates, using a 16550 and faster computer.

Doug


------------------------------

Date: Mon, 10 Jan 94 09:33:12 CST
From: "John Martin" <[e-mail]>
Subject: NOS FTP drive switch
To: [e-mail]

Does anyone know of a NOS version that will allow an FTP user to switch to
another disk drive and directory? We would like to make a CD Drive
available via FTP. We are currently using net1itl, but have tried several
versions and get the same results.
------
                                _______
                               /       |
   John W. Martin             /        |   INTERNET:
   Systems Programmer        /         |   [e-mail]
   Mississippi Central Data  |    C    |   [e-mail]
   Processing Authority      \    D    |   PACKET:
   301 North Lamar Street     |   P    |   kb5ggo @ k5qne.ms.usa.na
   301 Building, Suite 508    /   A    |
   Jackson, MS 39201-1495    /         |   PHONE: [phone]
                            |______    |   FAX:   [phone]
                                  /    |
                                  \____|

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 10 Jan 94 20:32:48 EST
From: [e-mail] (Brian A. Lantz)
Subject: NOS FTP drive switch
To: [e-mail]

In message <[e-mail]_POPMail/PC_3.2.3_Beta_2> [e-mail] writes:
> Does anyone know of a NOS version that will allow an FTP user to switch to
> another disk drive and directory? We would like to make a CD Drive
> available via FTP. We are currently using net1itl, but have tried several
> versions and get the same results.
> ------

TNOS handles this (some other versions do, too). If you want to check it
out, I've got my SIMTEL 20 MSDOS ARCHIVE CD mounted and available for
FTP-picking. You can also "dir" it (etc.) from the BBS.

               /----------------------------------------------/
              /   Brian A. Lantz/KO4KS                       /
             /                                              /
            /   Packet:   KO4KS@KO4KS.#TPAFL.FL.USA.NA     /
           /   Internet: [e-mail]           /
          /          Live long, and prosper!             /
         /----------------------------------------------/

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 10 Jan 1994 23:16:37 -0500
From: [e-mail] (Ashok Aiyar)
Subject: NOS FTP drive switch
To: [e-mail]

>In message <[e-mail]_POPMail/PC_3.2.3_Beta_2>
[e-mail] writes:
>> Does anyone know of a NOS version that will allow an FTP user to switch to
>> another disk drive and directory? We would like to make a CD Drive
>> available via FTP. We are currently using net1itl, but have tried several
>> versions and get the same results.
>> ------
>
>TNOS handles this (some other versions do, too). If you want to check it
>out, I've got my SIMTEL 20 MSDOS ARCHIVE CD mounted and available for
>FTP-picking. You can also "dir" it (etc.) from the BBS.

If you have an older version of NOS that doesn't support it, it is
still relatively simple to use the DOS JOIN command and get NOS to
support it.

For example, my CDROM is drive F:\, NOS is on drive D:\, and I
want to make files on drive C:\ and F:\ available.

I run the following two JOIN commands before running NOS, and
everything works okay

JOIN C: D:\C
JOIN F: D:\F

within FTPUSERS, the anonymous path is
anonymous * /c/ashok/pub;/f/ 1

with similar paths for other users.  Works pretty well.  A pre-login
message file tells users to use "cd f" to reach the CD-ROM ....


Later,
Ashok
--
Ashok Aiyar                        Mail: [e-mail]
Department of Biochemistry                       Tel: [phone]
CWRU School of Medicine, Cleveland, Ohio         Fax: [phone]
MIME Enclosures OK

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 10 Jan 94 08:01:46 PST
From: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Extended KISS and SMACK specifications?
Reply-To: [e-mail]
News-Software: UReply 3.1
References: <[e-mail]>

In <[e-mail]> Phil Karn writes:
> ....
>Having said that, I think there's little reason these days to tolerate
>lost characters on a local hard-wired RS-232 link, given the fairly
>wide availability of 16550A chips with FIFOs. Overruns simply don't
>occur with those chips under credible situations, even on slow
>machines.
>
>Phil
>

While overruns are probably 95% of the serial errors, let us not
forget the bit errors.  One would hope that these are far and few
between but, in high RF levels, they tend to occur more frequently.

Roy Engehausen -- AA4RE -- [e-mail]

------------------------------

End of TCP-Group Digest V94 #7
******************************