jhc@mtung.UUCP (Jonathan Clark) (11/27/85)
We just received the following article (header edited for brevity): >Relay-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site mtung.UUCP >Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site islenet.UUCP >Path: mtung!mtunh!vax135!houxm!ihnp4!qantel!ptsfa!dual!islenet!tracyw >From: tracyw@islenet.UUCP (Tracy Walters) >Newsgroups: net.dcom >Subject: Re: Protocol Analyzers >Message-ID: <1873@islenet.UUCP> >Lines: 5 > >grams available from Tekelec. It's price is $20k > Another excellent analyzer but a lot less costly is the Halcyon 803B for $12k. >onfiguration control (they figure out on their own what the physical and transfer layer protocols are). >amming capability, but retails for $20k. Both have auto configuration control. >eeds. > It looks like the beginnings of each line have been munched, and possibly the line eater has had a go at it too (but the line count is good). Some of the lines look too long - is there a known bug in this area? Anyone recognize this problem? Of course, it could always be that the poster screwed up.... -- Jonathan Clark [NAC]!mtung!jhc My walk has become rather more silly lately.
richard@islenet.UUCP (Richard Foulk) (12/07/85)
In article <638@mtung.UUCP> jhc@mtung.UUCP (Jonathan Clark) writes: > We just received the following article (header edited for > brevity): > > >Relay-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site mtung.UUCP > >Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site islenet.UUCP > >Path: mtung!mtunh!vax135!houxm!ihnp4!qantel!ptsfa!dual!islenet!tracyw > >From: tracyw@islenet.UUCP (Tracy Walters) > >Newsgroups: net.dcom > >Subject: Re: Protocol Analyzers > >Message-ID: <1873@islenet.UUCP> > >Lines: 5 > > > >grams available from Tekelec. It's price is $20k > > Another excellent analyzer but a lot less costly is the Halcyon 803B for $12k. > >onfiguration control (they figure out on their own what the physical and transfer layer protocols are). > >amming capability, but retails for $20k. Both have auto configuration control. > >eeds. > > > It looks like the beginnings of each line have been > munched, and possibly the line eater has had a go at it too > (but the line count is good). Some of the lines look too > long - is there a known bug in this area? Anyone recognize > this problem? Of course, it could always be that the poster > screwed up.... > -- The article looks just like that here on islenet where it originated. It seems likely that the poster goofed somewhere. -- Richard Foulk ...{dual,vortex,ihnp4}!islenet!richard Honolulu, Hawaii or ...!islenet!bigtuna!richard