HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: ddrg@alfred.carleton.ca (Duncan Glendinning)
Subject: Native Windows PopMail Client?
Organization: Carleton University
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 1992 15:56:22 GMT

I'm sorry if this question has been asked a million times before, but I can't
seem to locate a FAQ list.  I'd like to know if there exists a native
ms-windows popmail client that sits on top of a packet driver.  Our mac users
are really happy with their interface, but our pc users aren't (because they
like to sit in windows all day).

Thanks...  duncan
From: duval@elpp1.epfl.ch (Basil P Duval)
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip.ibmpc
Subject: Newbie, FAQ, FTP, Packets
Date: 11 Nov 92 15:15:41 GMT
Followup-To: comp.protocols.tcp-ip.ibmpc
Organization: EPFL/CRPP

Ok,
	I have been looking into the business of packet drivers for the PC coming
from the world of VAX, SUN and Mac computers. I really would like to see if
anybody is going to say: Yes: I have a FAQ with some basic information>
there are about 2 posts per week of people trying to get into this news
group without annoying too many people, but no FAQ:

Anyway: my problem
I have the FTP software, and have managed to get other packet drivers
going.

I have a Western Digital board and a large (class B) ethernet system.

I have an experimental acquisition card in my PC that will be used to
acquire up to 30 Mbytes of data every 15 minutes. For this system, I would
like to be able to transfer the data directly to a large machine ( a CRAY )
and be done with my data collection.
	Since we have a large variety of machines, I thought of directly using an
FTP
connection to talk to the storage computer since FTP is supported by all
the 
machines I am going to use.

THE QUESTION:
	Is there a public source of an ftp(2) program that I can manipulate to
read blocks of data from my card instead of file blocks from the disc. I am
forced to write the code in MSC 6.0 to be linkable to the rest of the
acquisition system.
	So: has anybody out there a compilable and linkable source of a FTP(2)
program that I can rework to provide a pseudo FTP session which writes my
data
directly to a remote machine which works with MSC 6.0.
	I am trying to understand what porducts do exist but can only find source
code that is supposed to be compiled with MSC 4.0 or 5.0 and then is only
TFTP without the user login.

Basil Duval
DUVAL@elpp1.epfl.ch

PS: where is the machine that stores the old news items to this group.
(this is the sort of information that would be fine in a FAQ !!)
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip.ibmpc
From: vijghen@ids1.fynu.ucl.ac.be (Philippe Vijghen)
Subject: Sun RPC and Windows?
Organization: Free University of Brussels (ULB) - Astrophysic Dpt.
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 11:39:13 GMT

I am working on a project using a FTP server in a VME crate and
two kindsa of clients: X-Window or Windows. Therefore, I am waiting
for the realease of a WinSock compliant product: WinSock specification
is a library for Windows providing Berkeley compatible sockets. I should
be able to compile the Sun's RPC using this library beacause Sun RPC is
a public domain package using Berkeley sockets.

My problems:
	- There is still no version of WinSock compliant products.
	- I cannot figure out how to configure the winsock.dll beta-release
	  of NetManage with my 3com-501 / PC-NFS configuration.
	- I am afraid that the adaptation of Sun RPC to WinSock will
	  not not be so easy as it sould be.

What would help me?
	- a "ready to use" version of Sun RPC for Windows
	- a WinSock compliant library
	- a working beta-release of a WinSock compliant library

Thanks in advance for your hints.
(e-mail answers would be appreciated)

	Philippe VIJGHEN
	Ingenieur Civil AIrBr
	Searcher at the Free University of Brussels (ULB)
	vijghen@fynu.ucl.ac.be

P.S.  It's really a pitty that the RPC released with WIndows-NT are
      a new Microsoft proprietary spec.! Sun's RPC is the "de facto"
      standard!!!
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip.ibmpc
From: erick@sunee.uwaterloo.ca (Erick Engelke)
Subject: Re: ms-dos tar w/rmt protocol (& tcp) ?
Organization: University of Waterloo
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 18:12:10 GMT

>>>>   I'm probably the only person on the planet who want this, but does anyone
>>>>   know of an implementation of unix "tar" for ms-dos which has tcp and the
>>>>   "rmt" protocol built in?

>>>You're not the only one!  We ship just such a tar application with
>>>our DOS-based PC/TCP product (it uses rsh or failing that, rexec to
>>>run rmt).

>> Sorry, but FTP software does not ship a tar with the TCP built in as
>> the requestor wanted. Many TCP/IP vendors ship TAR running over their TCP/IP,
>> but not with the TCP/IP built in.

>You are quite right, our TAR does not literally have "tcp built in",
>rather it runs over our PC/TCP kernel (a terminate-and-stay-resident
>program which supports the TCP/IP protocol suite).

Perhaps this is an example of post (US) election and post (Cdn) referendum 
burnout, add to that the umpteen networking shows of October, and these
guys can really use a break!  

The best free implementation I have heard of was written by some fellows
at Universita' di Pisa.  It's based on GNU TAR and Luigi Rizzo's work
on WATTCP.  Sorry for missing the other credits, I can't seem to find
any docs.

You can pick up a copy in:
	sunee.uwaterloo.ca : pub/wattcp/pisa_tar.tar

If this isn't what you need, Russ Nelson did something of this sort 
with Karn's NOS serveral years ago and put the patches into:
	sun.soe.clarkson.edu : pub/ka9q/diffs.arc
I don't know if it's still there.

Erick
-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Erick Engelke				 	            WATTCP Architect
erick@development.uwaterloo.ca     TCP/IP was easy but i still can't work VI
From: trier@slc6.ins.cwru.edu (Stephen C. Trier)
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip.ibmpc
Subject: Re: Fragmented IP packets: any PD implementations?
Date: 9 Nov 1992 22:54:03 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
NNTP-Posting-Host: slc6.ins.cwru.edu
Keywords: IP fragments TCP/IP

Drat!  My apologies to those who read this newsgroup via mailing list,
since I can't cancel my message for you.  It was the classic "r" versus
"f" mistake, posting what was meant to be e-mail.

-- 
Stephen Trier                                     
Network Services Engineering, IRIS/INS/Telecom    
Case Western Reserve University                   
trier@ins.cwru.edu
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip.ibmpc
From: davis@chem.canterbury.ac.nz (John Davis)
Subject: Re: Fragmented IP packets: any PD implementations?
Reply-To: davis@chem.canterbury.ac.nz
Organization: Chem Dept, Uni of Canty, Chch, New Zealand
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 00:20:21 GMT

Stephen C. Trier (trier@odin.ins.cwru.edu) wrote:

> In the real world, fragments are not terribly important.  TCP intentionally
> avoids fragmenting data.  The only protocol I know of that intentionally
> sends fragments is NFS, which is supported by none of the packages you named.

try ftping from Mac's on appletalk talking MacTCP via a pcrouter - or using
slip , both of these result in fragmentation. Personally I'll be very
happy when NCSA telnet supports fragments ...

--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
| o  John Davis         davis@chem.canterbury.ac.nz      phone NZ+3642-421 o |
| o  (Depart)mental Programmer,Chem Dept, Univ of Canterbury, Chch, NZ     o |
| o   "I do not fear computers, I fear the lack of them" - Isaac Asimov    o |
From: driggins@SCTC.AF.MIL
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip.ibmpc
Subject: Re:  User experience: Installation of TCP/IP packages
Date: 10 Nov 92 07:11:34 GMT
Distribution: world
Organization: The Internet

We have had no real problems with FTPs PC/TCP itself.  My aggravation has been
with the 3rd party suppliers.  (The people we bought our NICs from).  I have 
installed TRW PC2001 and PC3001 cards (an intelligent card which is expensive,
but runs TCP/IP on its' own processor, in its' own memory) and had very little
trouble.  TRW put a little time and thought into their manuals.  Other cards
I have installed include WD8003's and its' 16 bit equivalent (under another name
)  each from different suppliers.  These suppliers slapped a little bit of
their own horribly written documentation onto FTPs TCP/IP docs and that was it.
It took ages to figure all the problems out, since 1-800 support doesn't help 
and isn't free over here in Germany.  

So there is my experience with TCP/IP.  I hope this helps, although I think
a lot of other people will report that it all depends on the supplier and 
manufacturer.  I have never seen the TRW cards marketed commercially, but
they do work exceptionally well and were the easiest to install and configure.

Drake Riggins
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip.ibmpc
From: erick@demorgan.uwaterloo.ca (Erick Engelke)
Subject: Re: Need PD lpd for PC/TCP
Organization: University of Waterloo
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 17:24:21 GMT

> wihuri@polaris.utu.fi (Pauli Wihuri) writes:
>ss@panix.com (Steve Steinberg) writes:
>>FTP software wants $400 for a line printer daemon.  Are there
>>any in the PD?  Are there any that do not require a dedicated
>>PC?
>
>Try software packet called KA9Q. It is found at least at NIC.FUNET.FI
>in directory /pub/msdos/networks/ka9q-tcpip.
>

Sorry, by KA9Q is not PD, and its copyright restrictions prevent it from
being used in a commercial setting without getting a license from Phil.

Phil has made wonderful contributions to the Internet in both areas of
theory and use.  Please observe the requests in his copyright.

The only TSR LPD that I know of is the commercial one packaged with 
Beame&Whiteside's product.  It is very small.  Contact sales@bws.com
for info.

Erick
-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Erick Engelke				 	            WATTCP Architect
erick@development.uwaterloo.ca     TCP/IP was easy but i still can't work VI
Organization: Penn State University
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 08:29:23 EST
From: Christopher Sacksteder <CJS@psuvm.psu.edu>
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip.ibmpc
Subject: Re: POPmail under MS-DOS.
Distribution: comp
 <axa12.53.721518615@po.cwru.edu> <1992Nov12.145527.24441@news.acns.nwu.edu>
 <1992Nov12.231150.23286@unlv.edu> <1992Nov13.070415.5037@polaris.utu.fi>

In article <1992Nov13.070415.5037@polaris.utu.fi>, wihuri@polaris.utu.fi (Pauli
Wihuri) says:
>
>I was wondering if there exists such software which would work like
>POPMAIL, but would leave the mail in unix-machine and not transfer it
>to PC.

Many of the POP3 clients provide an option to not delete the mail
from the host machine when it is retreived by the client.  NUPop has
such an option.  Mail is *copied* to the PC.
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip.ibmpc
From: beame@maccs.dcss.mcmaster.ca (Carl Beame)
Subject: Re: Need PD lpd for PC/TCP
Organization: McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
Date: Sat, 14 Nov 1992 03:22:00 GMT

In article <1e1ip3INNn02@seven-up.East.Sun.COM> geoff@tyger.Eng.Sun.COM (Geoff Arnold @ Sun BOS - R.H. coast near the top) writes:

[stuff delete]

>There's also an LPD bundled with PC-NFS. It can be used as a TSR,
>although it's by no means as small as B&W's. (We elected to support
>multiple printers; I think the B&W version handles just one.)

	Our DOS LPD tsr supports only one printer and takes 6K of memory,
but our Windows LPD supports as many printers as the Windows PrintManager
has.

>
>Geoff
>--
>Geoff Arnold, PC-NFS architect, Sun Select. (geoff.arnold@East.Sun.COM)
>-----------

- Carl Beame
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip.ibmpc
Subject: LanView and Telnet in win 3.1?
From: jehresman@eagle.wesleyan.edu
Date: 11 Nov 92 11:13:06 EST
Organization: Wesleyan University

We are trying to run Remote Lanview for Windows (lan management software using
tcp/ip) and NCSA telnet on the same win 3.1 workstation.  The problem is both
want to use packet drivers.  I've tried pktmux, but for some reason Remote
Lanview for Windows won't work with it.  Does anyone have any suggestions as to
how to get these two apps to work together short of putting in another ethernet
card?  We would be willing to buy a commercial product if that would get the
job done.

Thanks in advance,

John Ehresman
(jehresman@eagle.wesleyan.edu)
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip.ibmpc
From: dblack@ccla.demon.co.uk (David Black)
Subject: TCP/IP Packet analyser
Organization: Crucible Computers Ltd.
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 14:35:56 +0000


 Is there a Public domain IP packet analyser that I can run on a
 PC through the packet driver i/f. I need it for debugging purposes.

 /Dave Black
                                
=
David Black             49 Woodgrange Drive     dblack@ccla.demon.co.uk
Crucible Computers      Southend On Sea         dblack@cix.compulink.co.uk    
Networking Consultant   Essex UK SS1 2SD        Flies AA5B G-NGBI
                                
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip.ibmpc
From: br.pct@RLG.Stanford.EDU (Peter C Tam)
Subject: Available telnetD vendors
Organization: Research Libraries Group, INC.
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 04:15:12 GMT

Hi,
  Pardon me, I remenber seeing a reply to such question 
  "List of Telnet Server under MSDOS preferrably multi-sessions"
  a few weeks ago. I suddenly need such information myself.
  I can either do:

  (1) Ask for ftp sites of comp.protocols.tcp-ip.ibmpc archive (which I
  would like to know anyway) & find the article.
                               or 
  (2) Repeat the same question again. (which is what I am doing).

  I already know about WATTCP telnetD (GREAT), but it cannot do multi-
sessions.
  Thanks for any information!!!!!!

+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Peter C. Tam                         InterNet: br.pct@RLG.Stanford.EDU    |
| Fax: (415) 964-0943                  BitNet:   br.pct@RLG.BITNET          |
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip.ibmpc
From: donp@novell.com (don provan)
Subject: Re: Fragmented IP packets: any PD implementations?
Keywords: IP fragments TCP/IP
Organization: Novell, Inc., San Jose, California
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 23:08:48 GMT

In article <BxGtps.BHM@watserv1.uwaterloo.ca> erick@demorgan.uwaterloo.ca (Erick Engelke) writes:
>A common misconception is that we will get fragmented packets from
>outside our LAN, such as gateways through slower media.  But it is
>the gateway's responsibility to reassemble the frags before putting
>the data onto the LAN at the other end.

I don't know where you picked this up, but it's wrong.  In fact, routers
are *forbidden* from doing IP reassembly for packets they are forwarding.
Just as well, since reassembly at an intermediate node can be quite
expensive, even compared to reassembly at the destination.

>That's why people using
>all these freeware TCPs didn't know they didn't have frag support.

No, i think your other point -- that freeware TCP applications don't
generate fragments -- is a better explanation of why this deficiency
is overlooked.

>Here's my frustration, fragments rely on 100% delivery and are 
>costly in gateways.  And when you encounter problems on your LAN,
>large UDP packets clog it in a needless and futile manner whereas 
>TCP adapts.

While these are fine arguments, they only argue against *applications*
which depend fragmentation, and in that context i support your
position entirely.  Unfortunately, the question here is whether any
given *IP implementation* should support fragmentation and reassembly.
If it doesn't, it can't support applications, environments, or peer
implementations which, for whatever reasons, require that facility.

>I might be convinced to add frag support, but would appreciate 
>opinion if it is a good idea, in particular, which applications
>could use it.  NFS is not a great answer since it would be useful
>even with 1K packet sizes, the problem there is the lack of an
>implementation.  I know the Host Requirements RFC tells us what
>to do, but I would prefer to see an application which needs it.

Although i understand how strapped for space you are in a PC, i don't
really see that implementing fragmentation and reassembly is that much
of a burden.  In the commercial IP world, the overhead in both space
and development effort is insignificant when compared to the effort of
marketing an incomplete IP implementation and then supporting it when
something that should work doesn't.  Free IP implementations have a
little more flexibility in this regard.
						don provan
						donp@novell.com
From: brad@fcr.com (Brad Parker)
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip.ibmpc
Subject: ms-dos tar w/rmt protocol (& tcp) ?
Date: 9 Nov 92 13:36:08 GMT
Distribution: world
Organization: The Internet


I'm probably the only person on the planet who want this, but does anyone
know of an implementation of unix "tar" for ms-dos which has tcp and the
"rmt" protocol built in?

this would allow me to integrate ms-dos backups with unix backups and
make moving code a lot easier.

If none exist, is this something others would like? (i.e. should I do
it myself?  I'd start with gnu-tar & gnu-lib for dos).

I trolled around and found some packet-driver/pcip based tools (rsh,
exec) but neither did stdio in a robust enough manner.  Also, pipes
under dos are nothing to write home about performance wise, so an
integrated solution would be better.

-brad
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip.ibmpc
From: pib@casbah.acns.nwu.edu (Philip R. Burns)
Subject: Re: POPmail under MS-DOS.
Keywords: popmail, pc-tcpip, msdos
Organization: Northwestern University, Evanston Illinois.
Distribution: comp
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 14:55:27 GMT

In article <axa12.53.721518615@po.cwru.edu> axa12@po.cwru.edu (Ashok Aiyar) writes:
>In article <BxIrw4.1uz@portal.hq.videocart.com> 
>	mandrews@portal.hq.videocart.com (Mike Andrews) writes:
>
>>POPMail has been much improved by Phil "PiB" Burns at NorthWestern
>University.>It's now called NUPop and it's excellent!
>
>NuPOP and POPmail/PC are two independent programs -- I do not believe that
>one has evolved into the other -- although the acknowledgement screens would
>indicate that their was/is much co-operation in their development.
>

NUPop was originally based upon UMinn's POPMail.  I started with whatever
version was current in June of 1991.  The programs have diverged in many
respects, and the code is quite different now.  I and the POPMail folks
at UMinn do exchange code regularly.

>NuPOP does offer features not found in POPMail/PC such as Webster,
>but POPmail/PC also has features not found in NuPOP -- such as support for
>a campus "whois" server running on any port.
>

You may use the FINGER client in NUPop to access WHOIS servers.  Just add
the port number (43 is typical) after the name of the whois server.

NUPop also includes a PH client.  We use PH at Northwestern for our address
server instead of whois.

>One important feature that POPmail/PC supports is that you can configure the
>POP server port - important on a campus such as ours where a POP3 server is
>being run on TCP port 109 (instead of the usual 110).  I am not sure whether
>NuPOP supports allows for this flexibility.
>

You may specify the port for ANY server in NUPop by placing it after the
name (or IP number) of the server.

>Ashok
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>                             Ashok Aiyar
>                     Department of Biochemistry
>                         CWRU Medical School
>                          axa12@po.cwru.edu
>----------------------------------------------------------------------


-- Phil "Pib" Burns
   Northwestern University
   Evanston, IL.  USA
   pib@nwu.edu

Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip.ibmpc
From: wihuri@polaris.utu.fi (Pauli Wihuri)
Subject: Re: POPmail under MS-DOS.
Keywords: popmail, msdos
Organization: University of Turku, Finland
Distribution: comp
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 92 07:04:15 GMT

I was wondering if there exists such software which would work like
POPMAIL, but would leave the mail in unix-machine and not transfer it
to PC.

This would make 'POPMAIL'-users able to read/send their mail from any
place and system where 'POPMAIL' has been implemented. I am looking
for PCGOPHER-like software which is made for MSDOS but uses NCSA
Telnet to connect into mainframes but for email!

Mr. Pauli Wihuri, Computing Centre, University of Turku, Finland, 
tel: +358-21-633-6518, fax: +358-21-633-6560
-- 
Pauli Wihuri, Turun yliopisto, 921-633 6518, fax: 921-633 6560
Lahja avartaa alat ihmiselle ja vie h{net isoisten pariin.
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip.ibmpc
From: THOMASG@epx.cis.umn.edu (Thomas D. Gasser)
Subject: Re: QvtNet 3.0
Organization: Department of Neurosurgery, University of Minnesota
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 15:13:29 GMT

In article <1992Nov13.133751.1949@cognos.com> naubertp@cognos.com (Patrick Naubert) writes:
>From: naubertp@cognos.com (Patrick Naubert)
>Subject: QvtNet 3.0
>Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 13:37:51 GMT
>I just tried to FTPMAIL the new QvtNet 3.0, but to no avail...
>
>I tried ftp.cica.indiana.edu:/pub/pc/win3/uploads/qvtnet30.zip but it didn't
>hit...
>
>Anyone got the correct path to the file ?
>


They found a bug in 3.0 and pulled it off the server.  It should be back in 
a couple of days.



*********************************************************************
*  Thomas D. Gasser                                                 *
*  Department of Neurosurgery                *******     ******     *
*  University of Minnesota                    ***  *** *** ***      *
*  (612) 624-4427                             ***   *****  ***      *
*  E-Mail:  THOMASG@STAFF.TC.UMN.EDU         *****        *****     *
*                                                                   *
*********************************************************************
From: wew@naucse.cse.nau.edu (Bill Wilson)
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip.ibmpc
Subject: Listserv for PCTCP?
Keywords: tcpip
Date: 11 Nov 92 20:11:06 GMT
Organization: Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff AZ

Is anyone aware of public listserv software that runs with
FTP software's PCTCP package?

Thanks.

-- 
Let sleeping dragons lie........                    | The RoleMancer 
--------------------------------------------------------------------
William Wilson (wew@naucse.cse.nau.edu | wilson@nauvax)
Northern AZ Univ  Flagstaff, AZ 86011
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip.ibmpc
From: ayman@eecs.umich.edu (Ayman I. Kayssi)
Subject: Re: Native Windows PopMail Client?
Organization: ACAL, EECS, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 17:58:28 GMT

Michel.Davidoff@sonoma.edu (Michel Davidoff) wrote:
>Yes, It's called WinQVtnet and it's also a Telnet/FTP/NewsReader/POP3
>Can find it at ftp.cica.indiana.edu in the directory /pub/win3/upload.
>Current version is 2.85

It's in /pub/pc/win3/uploads, and the current version is 3.0 (qvtnet30.zip)
A PC-NFS version is said to be available too, but not on CICA.

--
Ayman I. Kayssi                               |    ayman@eecs.umich.edu
EECS Department                               +------------------------
University of Michigan                        |          (313) 764-8033
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip.ibmpc