Re: anonymous messages

Wed, 09 Nov 88 08:59:10 -0800

I asked "Well, what's wrong with this idea?" and I got a one sentence response
from Chris Torek:

        The definition of `secure port' is Unix-dependent.

Well, that takes care of that! Sorry, I didn't realize that. Of course,
it should have been obvious at the outset that a PC on the network would
destroy that idea even if it *had* been true before!

(Of course, I also got some rather childish responses from people at
and, but I guess a certain amount of that should be expected.)

Thanks for straightening me out.


This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Thu Mar 09 2000 - 14:44:29 GMT