Larry Backman (interlan!backman@EDDIE.MIT.EDU)
1 Oct 87 15:23:05 GMT

In article <8709291511.AA18314@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU> PADLIPSKY@A.ISI.EDU (Michael Padlipsky) writes:
>Never having been at all fond of reinventing wheels, I hastened to
>FTP the SUPDUP RFC and print it out at my terminal. When I got to
>"Due to the highly interactive characteristics of both the SUPDUP
>protocol and the ITS system [which was the original Server for which
>the protocol was developed], all transactions are strictly character
>at a time and all echoing is remote" I aborted the printing. Am I


        Me too. SUPDUP has been in the back of my mind for the past year
        as a viable TELNET alternative. However, examination of the
        spec reveals that it too does remote host echoing. The product
        that we provide, TELNET through a TCP gateway from a Novell LAN to the w
        orld has
        4 hops to go through before a typed character reappears on the
        screen. Each keystroke on a PC workstation goes across the Novell
        subnet to the gateway, from the gateway to the remote host, and
        thence back from where it came. We do all sorts of tricks in the
        PC to limit subnet traffic, buffering et. al. but no matter what
        you do, the remote echo is a killer.

        I am looking for alternatives also. Ideas? solutions?

                                        Larry Backman
                                        Micom - Interlan

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Thu Mar 09 2000 - 14:39:34 GMT