分享
 
 
 

RFC719 - Discussion on RCTE

王朝other·作者佚名  2008-05-31
窄屏简体版  字體: |||超大  

Network Working Group Jon Postel (SRI-ARC)

Request for Comments: 719 Jul 76

NIC #36138

Discussion on RCTE

The following is the significant portion of a dialog on RCTE that has

followed the publication of RFC718.

15-Jul-76 Nancy Mimno (BBN-NET)

Jon,

I've read RFC718 and have got some comments, in particular with

respect to the "third problem" or clearing the input buffer part.

1) I believe the stated implementation is backwards: in the normal

case of the RCTE mode negotiation, the server sends "WILL RCTE" and

the user sends ,"DO RCTE"; the reverse case is thus the server sending

"DO RCTE" and the user "WILL RCTE" Also, it is probably wise to say

eXPlicitly that the server's sending "DO RCTE" requires the user

process to respond "WILL (or WON'T) RCTE" and that this response is

the synchronizing mark.

2) The problem is a real one and I think the RCTE protocol would be

better with a "clear input, reset counters" function. The question is

Ill now to do it. In talking with Rav yesterday, I learned that he had

this in mind as a general function, not restricted to RCTE; in fact,

TENEX sends the "reverse RCTE" option for "clear your input buffer"

whether or not the connection is in RCTE mode. In this case, the

statement about "cannot be confused with the normal use of the RCTE

option" will not always be true. I think we both agreed that the

current solution should just be an interim one.

3) I suggest a different way of performing this function, using the

synch-datamark sequence. First, the RCTE option would have to

explicitly require that this function reset the counters and cause a

"clear your input buffer (of data)", all synchronized with the

datamark of course. This is pretty mUCh what it is now except for

the reset counters; receiving Synch-data mark when in RCTE probably

needed defining anyhow. Because RCTE won't work unless both sides

agree, the "clear input and reset counters" meaning for

synch-data mark would have to be a mandatory part of the RCTE option.

Second, since the Synch-data mark is a "one-way" function, there needs

to be a way for one side of the connection to tell the other side to

"send me a Synch-data mark". The New Telnet protocol spec implied that

Abort Output could be used for that purpose; if hot, then perhaps a

new function could be defined. Again, the RCTE option should make

some explicit statement requiring (or very strongLy recommending)

this interpretation of AO. For non-RCTE mode, it's a nice idea but

probably not required. Ray has tentatively agreed- thinks it could

work on Tenex (server side). I would like your comments and Doug

Dodds' (Tenex user RCTE). I don't know of any other existing RCTE

implementations that would have to change. I also don't know what it

-1-

takes to extend official protocols these days, but maybe it's easier

to do that than define a new option (ie reverse RCTE).

Regards,

Nancy

15-Jul-76 Doug Dodds (BBN-RCC)

Nancy,

Your suggestion for the RCTE-clear function being performed by the Au

command (when RCTE is on) is a good one. I see no problem with it

from the side of the Tenex User Telnet (NTELNET). At present NTELNET

is ignoring AO (and some other commands) entirely; this is a good

opportunity to implement it in general.

Doug

21-Jul-76 Jon Postel (SRI-ARC)

I met with Ray Tomlinson for a few minutes to discuss the RCTE-clear

function and other RCTE features. We agreed that Nancy's suggestion

for using the AO command for the clear function made sense. We also

determined that the RCTE document should say something about the

state some other options should be in when using RCTE. For example we

believe that GO-AHEAD must be suppressed while RCTE is in use, that

when one quits RCTE the ECHO mode must be restored to what it was at

the time of entering RCTE,, and that BINARY and RCTE do not make sense

as a combination because every byte would have to be assumed to be a

break character. We also determined that it is unworkable to use

RCTE and no break characters since there is no way to get out of that

state.

22-Jul-76 Jon Postel (SRI-ARC)

As a result of the above discussion I will prepare a revised RCTE

specification document. A draft will be distributed to interested

parties for comments and the final document will be published as an

RFC.

 
 
 
免责声明:本文为网络用户发布,其观点仅代表作者个人观点,与本站无关,本站仅提供信息存储服务。文中陈述内容未经本站证实,其真实性、完整性、及时性本站不作任何保证或承诺,请读者仅作参考,并请自行核实相关内容。
2023年上半年GDP全球前十五强
 百态   2023-10-24
美众议院议长启动对拜登的弹劾调查
 百态   2023-09-13
上海、济南、武汉等多地出现不明坠落物
 探索   2023-09-06
印度或要将国名改为“巴拉特”
 百态   2023-09-06
男子为女友送行,买票不登机被捕
 百态   2023-08-20
手机地震预警功能怎么开?
 干货   2023-08-06
女子4年卖2套房花700多万做美容:不但没变美脸,面部还出现变形
 百态   2023-08-04
住户一楼被水淹 还冲来8头猪
 百态   2023-07-31
女子体内爬出大量瓜子状活虫
 百态   2023-07-25
地球连续35年收到神秘规律性信号,网友:不要回答!
 探索   2023-07-21
全球镓价格本周大涨27%
 探索   2023-07-09
钱都流向了那些不缺钱的人,苦都留给了能吃苦的人
 探索   2023-07-02
倩女手游刀客魅者强控制(强混乱强眩晕强睡眠)和对应控制抗性的关系
 百态   2020-08-20
美国5月9日最新疫情:美国确诊人数突破131万
 百态   2020-05-09
荷兰政府宣布将集体辞职
 干货   2020-04-30
倩女幽魂手游师徒任务情义春秋猜成语答案逍遥观:鹏程万里
 干货   2019-11-12
倩女幽魂手游师徒任务情义春秋猜成语答案神机营:射石饮羽
 干货   2019-11-12
倩女幽魂手游师徒任务情义春秋猜成语答案昆仑山:拔刀相助
 干货   2019-11-12
倩女幽魂手游师徒任务情义春秋猜成语答案天工阁:鬼斧神工
 干货   2019-11-12
倩女幽魂手游师徒任务情义春秋猜成语答案丝路古道:单枪匹马
 干货   2019-11-12
倩女幽魂手游师徒任务情义春秋猜成语答案镇郊荒野:与虎谋皮
 干货   2019-11-12
倩女幽魂手游师徒任务情义春秋猜成语答案镇郊荒野:李代桃僵
 干货   2019-11-12
倩女幽魂手游师徒任务情义春秋猜成语答案镇郊荒野:指鹿为马
 干货   2019-11-12
倩女幽魂手游师徒任务情义春秋猜成语答案金陵:小鸟依人
 干货   2019-11-12
倩女幽魂手游师徒任务情义春秋猜成语答案金陵:千金买邻
 干货   2019-11-12
 
推荐阅读
 
 
 
>>返回首頁<<
 
靜靜地坐在廢墟上,四周的荒凉一望無際,忽然覺得,淒涼也很美
© 2005- 王朝網路 版權所有