Subject: Re: sup via term
To: None <firstname.lastname@example.org, markus@TechFak.Uni-Bielefeld.DE>
From: Olaf Seibert <email@example.com>
Date: 01/17/1995 12:02:14
Markus Illenseer wrote:
> TERM is not that good but the ebst approach for Unix. I'd rather want
> something like TIA under ADos for NetBSD...
I thought TIA to be a cheap (well, expensive) ripoff of term, but
it turns out that term is not only cheaper but better too.
I briefly looked into term to see if its protocol could be changed to
be compatible with SLIP. I noticed that term can do much more than
could be transparently tunneled through SLIP - some new protocol above
IP would need to be invented for passing the extra stuff (file
operations, passing calls such as listen(), bind(), accept(),
socket(..AF_UNIX..), getsockname(), getpeername()). Especially
"passive" socket operations can't be done using plain SLIP, the rest
may or may not be unimportant.
The disadvantage of term is that for those passive socket ops it would
need a special "term" version of the application, but of course one
could make an LKM to patch and trap the appropriate system calls, and
send out IP-encapsulated control info to the other end of the line.
___ Olaf 'Rhialto' Seibert firstname.lastname@example.org What's the use of
\X/ racism if you can't even see if a person belongs to your abhorred kind?