weikert@nadc.arpa (02/12/87)
Has anyone implemented a scheme on a UNIX system whereby you call in to the machine, do a (fake) login of some kind, hang up, then the machine (knowing who you are from the fake login) looks up your number and calls YOU to make the session complete? Thanks for any pointers. Please reply to : weikert@nadc.arpa
attc@desoto.UUCP (02/16/87)
Try the ct command!
emigh@ecsvax.UUCP (02/19/87)
In article <288@desoto.UUCP> attc@desoto.UUCP (ATT Communications) writes: >Try the ct command! Quote from AT&T 3B2 System V Release 3.0, page 34 The ct command is not compatible with the Basic Networking Utilities. Do not use this command. -- Ted H. Emigh Genetics and Statistics, North Carolina State U, Raleigh NC USENET: emigh@ecsvax.uucp ARPA: mcnc!ecsvax!emigh@BERKELEY BITNET: NEMIGH@TUCC
levy@ttrdc.UUCP (02/24/87)
In article <2695@ecsvax.UUCP>, emigh@ecsvax.UUCP writes: >In article <288@desoto.UUCP> attc@desoto.UUCP (ATT Communications) writes: >>Try the ct command! > >Quote from AT&T 3B2 System V Release 3.0, page 34 > > The ct command is not compatible with the Basic Networking Utilities. >Do not use this command. >-- >Ted H. Emigh Genetics and Statistics, North Carolina State U, Raleigh NC The original message is gone from my system and I can't remember whether the original requestor said he had SVR3 or SVR2. I _have_ gotten ct to work, after a fashion, on a SVR2 3B2 system with at least one dial-in port which is different from a free dial-out port. How I kludged it was to dial in, then "exec ct -s 'speed' -v 'your_number'". (Note, the "exec" is needed, else the original dial in port will be tied up by the shell even after the "ct" finishes.) ct will acquire the acu and then hang you up, at which point it will (try to) call you back using the acu. I do not know if this kludge would work on SVR3 (do not have it handy to try). It might fail on SVR3 for different reasons than on SVR2. -- ------------------------------- Disclaimer: The views contained herein are | dan levy | my own and are not at all those of my em- | an engihacker @ | ployer or the administrator of any computer | at&t computer systems division | upon which I may hack. | skokie, illinois | -------------------------------- Path: ..!{akgua,homxb,ihnp4,ltuxa,mvuxa, allegra,ulysses,vax135}!ttrdc!levy
root@sdd.UUCP (02/26/87)
In article <2695@ecsvax.UUCP> emigh@ecsvax.UUCP (Ted Emigh) writes: > >Quote from AT&T 3B2 System V Release 3.0, page 34 > > The ct command is not compatible with the Basic Networking Utilities. >Do not use this command. >-- You Got to be kidding.... Why should this command not be used!!! In what ways is it not compatible. I have a strong need for this command or equivalent... Daniel Corbett VP Engineering Software Design & Development Corp.
paddock@melpad.UUCP (02/27/87)
Under System V release 2 on 3b2 400's the ct command works fine
and coexists with basic networking if and only if the ct command
finds an outdial only dialer. A more precise statement of the problem
would be 'the ct command does not function properly using ports
with /usr/lib/uucp/uugetty running on them. Arranging the order of
ports in /usr/lib/uucp/Devices can increase the probability of
success.
--
Steve Paddock
{ihnp4,allegra,ut-sally}!ut-ngp!melpad!paddock