Date: Mon, 31 May 93 04:30:10 PDT
From: Advanced Amateur Radio Networking Group <tcp-group@ucsd.edu>
Errors-To: TCP-Group-Errors@UCSD.Edu
Reply-To: TCP-Group@UCSD.Edu
Precedence: Bulk
Subject: TCP-Group Digest V93 #140
To: tcp-group-digest
TCP-Group Digest Mon, 31 May 93 Volume 93 : Issue 140
Today's Topics:
Questions about Ka9Q SMTP implementation (2 msgs)
Thenet X-1H (2 msgs)
Send Replies or notes for publication to: <TCP-Group@UCSD.Edu>.
Subscription requests to <TCP-Group-REQUEST@UCSD.Edu>.
Problems you can't solve otherwise to brian@ucsd.edu.
Archives of past issues of the TCP-Group Digest are available
(by FTP only) from UCSD.Edu in directory "mailarchives".
We trust that readers are intelligent enough to realize that all text
herein consists of personal comments and does not represent the official
policies or positions of any party. Your mileage may vary. So there.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sun, 30 May 1993 15:18:26 -0400
From: ashok@biochemistry.BIOC.CWRU.Edu (Ashok Aiyar)
Subject: Questions about Ka9Q SMTP implementation
To: tcp-group@ucsd.edu
Hello:
I have a question about the Ka9Q implementation of SMTP server. I have noticed that it will accept the DATA command after RCPT in the absence of a previously given MAIL command.
I was looking at RFC 821 and this is not legal. I have two very simple fixes.
In the first, I can make acceptance of "RCPT TO:" dependent on a previously given valid "MAIL FROM:" command.
In the second, I can make acceptance of the DATA dependent on both "MAIL FROM:" and "RCPT TO:" being issued previously, in any order.
>From my reading of the RFC, it is not clear which of the two is better? I have seen that some SMTP gateways like Charon make "RCPT TO:" dependent on "MAIL FROM:", while others like Sendmail will accept "RCPT TO:" and "MAIL FROM:" in any order, but accept
"DATA" only after both MAIL and RCPT have been issued.
Is any one of these preferred over the other? If anyone is interested in the fix, I can mail it to you ....
Thanks,
Ashok
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 30 May 93 15:53:40 -0700
From: karn@qualcomm.com (Phil Karn)
Subject: Questions about Ka9Q SMTP implementation
To: ashok@biochemistry.BIOC.CWRU.Edu, tcp-group@ucsd.edu
What's wrong with just accepting the RCPT TO: command? Be conservative
in what you send, be liberal in what you accept...
Phil
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 27 May 1993 06:27:00
From: Mark.Aitken@csource.oz.au (Mark Aitken)
Subject: Thenet X-1H
To: tcp-group@ucsd.edu
To: mulga!hhcs.gov.au!makinc
On 05-21-93 mulga!hhcs.gov.au!makinc wrote to All...
> Is anyone using this software?
>
> We're trying to get it running and are having some problems.
>
Hi Carl,
Have a chat to Bryan Weeks, VK3BLW (Raven Haven). He has a
TNC with X1H in it, as does the MPRG (VK3AVE).
I am not sure that Bryan has the X1H digipeat callsign problem
licked either, there where a few problems as well when I was
looking at Bryan's NODE but it is now QSYed to the mainstrean
AX25 freq away from us TCP/IP boys and I cant see it direct!
Hope you have luck
Mark Aitken VK3JMA@VK3BLW
... OFFLINE 1.50
* Origin: AMNET - The Radio Amateurs BBS (3:635/502)
--
Via FidoNet/AARNET gateway - 3:632/400@fidonet and Pro-Net Australia
within Australia, call for more information on joining Pro-Net (03) 349-2266
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 30 May 93 15:34:52 PDT
From: Federal Science Network Development Manager 30-May-1993 1832 <segrest@bobseg.enet.dec.com>
Subject: Thenet X-1H
To: tcp-group@ucsd.edu
Greetings,
We have been running an X1H node on a local mountain top since November without
any apparent problem. We use it as a TCP/IP router and have the netrom costs
set high enough to effectively disable them.
Can someone please provide me with a more detailed explanation of the "X1H
digipeat callsign problem"? If everyone else is having the problem I guess I am
too. It would be useful if I could identify it.
Bob Segrest
KD4PWU
------------------------------
End of TCP-Group Digest V93 #140
******************************
******************************