mrc@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU (Mark Crispin) (04/06/89)
Hi -
I am porting an IMAP2 (RFC 1064) client from Unix to MS-DOS. I need to
have a good TCP under it. As the client routines are portable (even to
TOPS-20!!) I'm not tied to sockets or streams or JFN's :-) in any way; there's
a jacket layer between how my client talks TCP and the actual TCP for this
system.
I've heard n different stories about which TCP is "best". Here are my
preferences, and I'd appreciate some guidelines:
. public domain w/ sources. Not essential but it would make my job a LOT
easier.
. SLIP support over COM1. One of the desired goals is to be able to take a
Toshiba laptop, dial up, and start mail hacking.
. domain support. Not super-critical but nice to have.
. a TCP library package that I can link in with my application with a halfway
reasonable set of calling conventions.
The leading condenders seem to be KA9Q and NCSA. Can anyone give me any
reasonable comments to help me pick which one that I can justify to my
management? This is a secondary task for me (albeit an important one) and I
would rather not have to go through a lengthy evaluation process on my own.
-- Mark --
-------clements@bbn.com (Bob Clements) (04/06/89)
In article <MS-C.607804220.377401575.mrc@SUMEX-AIM.Stanford.EDU> mrc@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU (Mark Crispin) writes: > I've heard n different stories about which TCP is "best". Here are my >preferences, and I'd appreciate some guidelines: > . public domain w/ sources. ... > The leading condenders seem to be KA9Q and NCSA. ... >-- Mark -- At the risk of being tediously pedantic and repetitive, the KA9Q package is NOT public domain. It's copyrighted but freely copyable for non-commercial use. (Phil has made arrangements for commercial use in some cases, which I point out because I'm sure he wouldn't use the net himself to advertise.) /Rcc