[comp.protocols.tcp-ip.ibmpc] Sources for Telnet/FTP Servers for DOS and OS/2

eric@daccess.com (Eric Ashley) (04/10/91)

I have seen mention of a Telnet/FTP servers for both DOS and OS/2.  If someone
could repeat the sources for these, it would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks,
Eric Ashley

BRYAN@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU (Jerry Bryan) (04/11/91)

On 04/10/91 at 09:05:37 Eric Ashley said:
>I have seen mention of a Telnet/FTP servers for both DOS and OS/2.  If someone
>could repeat the sources for these, it would be greatly appreciated.

IBM's TCP/IP for OS/2 includes several servers, including TELNET, FTP, TFTP,
TALK, and LPD.  The TELNET is somewhat limited because it is linemode only
and does not support Presentation Manager sorts of things.

fks@FTP.COM (Frances Selkirk) (04/11/91)

I think most TCP/IP packages for OS/2 have telnet servers built in.
I could be wrong about this - I know that ours, IBM's and Essex's do.
I am not sure about 3Com, Ungerman-Bass or Racal Interlan. It seems 
like a logical addition for a multitasking system! 


Frances Kirk Selkirk		 info@ftp.com	           (617) 246-0900
FTP Software, Inc.		 26 Princess Street, Wakefield, MA  01880

jbvb@FTP.COM ("James B. Van Bokkelen") (04/11/91)

    I have seen mention of a Telnet/FTP servers for both DOS and OS/2.

The Essex Systems, IBM and FTP Software commercial OS/2 TCP/IP packages
include Telnet servers, but they are limited in that you can't run PM
applications through them (they emulate DEC VTxxx terminals).  Both
Clarkson and Stanford have DOS Telnet servers, but I'm not sure if or
how they license the source.  They are both limited to character-only
applications, and will have trouble with anything that does its own
keyboard I/O.

James B. VanBokkelen		26 Princess St., Wakefield, MA  01880
FTP Software Inc.		voice: (617) 246-0900  fax: (617) 246-0901

gts@MICA.BERKELEY.EDU (Greg Small) (04/12/91)

= From pcip-request@louie.udel.edu Wed Apr 10 15:43:50 1991
= From: Frances Selkirk <fks@ftp.com>
= It seems like a logical addition for a multitasking system!

Actually, its a darn useful addition for any system.
For example, how do I read mail received on my PC when I am at another location?

Gregory T Small                                      (415)642-5979
Personal Computer Networking & Communications        gts@violet.Berkeley.EDU
Workstation Support Services - Software Group        ucbvax!jade!gts
267 Evans Hall                                       SPGGTS@UCBCMSA.BITNET
University of California, Berkeley, Ca 94720

jbvb@FTP.COM ("James B. Van Bokkelen") (04/12/91)

    ... how do I read mail received on my PC when I am at another location?

The PCMAIL protocol (RFC 1056) is designed to maintain a consistent mail
state for a user across several clients (which may not have full-time
network connections) accessing a single "mail repository".  It's what
quite a few of us at FTP Software use.  An improved version of Mark Lambert's
4.3bsd freeware client/repository can be found on vax.ftp.com, in one
of the pub/pc8xx directories.

James B. VanBokkelen		26 Princess St., Wakefield, MA  01880
FTP Software Inc.		voice: (617) 246-0900  fax: (617) 246-0901

gts@MICA.BERKELEY.EDU (Greg Small) (04/13/91)

= From jbvb@ftp.com Thu Apr 11 20:29:03 1991
= To: Greg Small <gts@mica>
= Subject: Re:  Sources for Telnet/FTP Servers for DOS and OS/2
= From: jbvb@ftp.com  (James B. Van Bokkelen)
=  ... how do I read mail received on my PC when I am at another location?
= The PCMAIL protocol (RFC 1056) .....

Sorry I wasn't clearer in my post.  The question was rhetorical as an example
of why I would want to have a Telnet client for my PC.  Since I save mail on
my PC both for reference and for later reply, etc.  The tools on my PC are
really quite a bit better than on UNIX or other "real" systems ;-). While PCMAIL
is a solution if all mail is saved on UNIX, it does not help if the mail is
saved on the PC.  The many serial tools to connect to a PC clearly indicate both
the possibility and demand for such a capability.

I never have understood the network vendors reluctance to provide a full suite
of TCP/IP software for PCs under DOS.  For every client application there should
be a server application.  The "lack of multitasking" is not a valid complaint
for two reasons.  First there are many instances where even a one-at-a-time
implementation whould be useful (as for a Telnet server, or rsh server, or ...).
Secondly, where the collection of programs are all from one vendor, they could
easily be multitasked by cooperative conventions or using a common kernel.

Gregory T Small                                      (415)642-5979
Personal Computer Networking & Communications        gts@violet.Berkeley.EDU
Workstation Support Services - Software Group        ucbvax!jade!gts
267 Evans Hall                                       SPGGTS@UCBCMSA.BITNET
University of California, Berkeley, Ca 94720

jbvb@FTP.COM ("James B. Van Bokkelen") (04/16/91)

    ...I never have understood the network vendors reluctance to provide a
    full suite of TCP/IP software for PCs under DOS.  For every client
    application there should be a server application....

What you think is reluctance is actually inability.  Unless you have a
386 processor, it is simply impossible to build something that can trap
every possible way an application might write to the PC's screen or read
from the keyboard, so that *all* applications can be run from the Telnet
server.  The two extant academic efforts will probably work with 60-70%
of available DOS applications.  With a lot of work, and a long learning
curve, you could probably get that up to 85-90%, but I have no interest
in shipping something that might be returned as unusable by 1 customer
in 10.

A second problem is the Telnet Network Virtual Terminal model, which doesn't
map cleanly to the PC's directly addressable display memory and keyboard
hardware.  If the application displays a bright violet on green smiley-face,
or goes into graphics mode on your EGA, what do you tell the real or simulated
VT100 on the other end to print?  What does the user have to type when the
application is looking for Alt-LeftShift?  Carbon Copy and PC/Anywhere have
their own proprietary datastream, designed to handle the PC's capabilities,,
and the job is simpler because both client and server are PCs.  If you want
to do a good mapping with public protocols, you're probably going to wind
up with X...

James B. VanBokkelen		26 Princess St., Wakefield, MA  01880
FTP Software Inc.		voice: (617) 246-0900  fax: (617) 246-0901