"Lajos Zaccomer (ETH)" wrote:
> You may be interested with my results, thus I summarize briefly what
> I am very much surprised of. You were absolutely right with the order
> of negotiation messages (not surprised of this). I may not know in
> English good (or bad? :-) enough for an RFC. What I w
On Tuesday 22 January 2002 16:16, Lajos Zaccomer wrote:
Hi,
> Thanx for the impressive welcome, Terry. Yes, I might be wrong; however, in
> this case, please interpret the following quotation from RFC854, page 4:
Huh? I didn't see anything wrong in Terry's answer.
> Might be you who don't und
Hi,
Thanx for the impressive welcome, Terry. Yes, I might be wrong; however, in this case,
please interpret the following quotation from RFC854, page 4:
"In summary, WILL XXX is sent, by either party, to indicate that
party's desire (offer) to begin performing option XXX, DO XXX and
DON'T
"Lajos Zaccomer (ETH)" wrote:
>
>Part 1.1Type: Plain Text (text/plain)
Don't send HTML to the list.
The problem is likely that you have not fully understood option
negotiation. The negotiation is do/don't/will/won't.
See the RFCs, in particular, RFC855. Also, type "telnet" into
the searc
Title: Telnet option negotiation
Hi FreeBSD experts,
I wrote a VERY simple telnet program that actually works as a Network Virtual Terminal. It is achieved by sending "WON'T XXX" to all "DO XXX" server requests. It should work according to RFC-854, page 4: "Sinc
5 matches
Mail list logo
