Miyata@MIT-MULTICS.ARPA (01/14/86)
Anyone have any experience with TCP/IP implementations for IBM-PCs (and compatibles)? If there is sufficient response, I will summarize them for the distribution. Thanks, Gaylord
tcp-ip@ucbvax.UUCP (01/16/86)
In article <860114072549.207020@MIT-MULTICS.ARPA> you write: >Anyone have any experience with TCP/IP implementations for IBM-PCs (and >compatibles)? If there is sufficient response, I will summarize them >for the distribution. > >Thanks, >Gaylord I have used the MIT PC/IP package with some degree of success. I have largely quit using it, however, in favor of serial protocols like Kermit because of various problems like: 1. Can't upload a file unless it already exists. 2. Can't upload a file unless it is accessible by everyone. 3. Occasional bit errors. What I would really like is rcp, rsh, and rlogin on a PC. Let me know if you find such. -- Thomas N. Anderson ...uw-beaver!teltone!tna Teltone Corporation, 10801 120th Ave NE, Kirkland, WA 98033 (206) 827-9626 "This Statement is False."
bzs@BOSTONU.CSNET (Barry Shein) (01/18/86)
>I have used the MIT PC/IP package with some degree of success. I have >largely quit using it, however, in favor of serial protocols like Kermit >because of various problems like: > > 1. Can't upload a file unless it already exists. > 2. Can't upload a file unless it is accessible by everyone. > 3. Occasional bit errors. > >What I would really like is rcp, rsh, and rlogin on a PC. Let me >know if you find such. >Thomas N. Anderson ...uw-beaver!teltone!tna Obviously your problem is not really PC/IP but the way TFTP works. A while back I modified our 4.2bsd TFTP to add the following capability: On a WRQ or a RRQ if there are strings past the mode they are assumed to be a login-name/password to be used, the fork from the server changes to that person's home directory and sets itself to be that user (setuid/setgid in UNIX.) Otherwise the default rules apply. For example: RRQ thesis/chapter1\0netascii\0bzs\0passwd\0 (where \0 means a null byte) I needed this because we had lisp machines and my own IP/UDP/TFTP implementations for the 3B2 and the mentioned restrictions would be, well, too restrictive for use, they didn't have TCP. It's all backwards compatible, if I were you I would consider this with your administration (there are security problems but they are worse in my opinion the old way, in fact my server currently *demands* a legal login/password, I just wouldn't run it at all without the addition.) It requires a few minor changes to server and client, I would suggest it (is this too far out of spec to be accepted? I think TFTP is almost useless w/o it for the user these days. The TFTP RFC also mentions that extensions are appreciated, here's one...[I realize diskless nodes are using TFTP to boot, that's a slightly different issue but manageable.]) -Barry Shein, Boston University