Date: Sat, 26 Jun 93 04:30:13 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 #165
To: tcp-group-digest
TCP-Group Digest Sat, 26 Jun 93 Volume 93 : Issue 165
Today's Topics:
HELP
Password security
UI vs I, datagram vs vc mode
UNIX and NEC2
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: Fri, 25 Jun 1993 09:25:21 -0600
From: "Loren E. Riblett" <lerible@somnet.sandia.gov>
Subject: HELP
To: tcp-group@ucsd.edu
HELP
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 25 Jun 93 03:41:53 -0700
From: karn@qualcomm.com (Phil Karn)
Subject: Password security
To: JT@zfja-gate.fuw.edu.pl
I argue that speed is much more important than code size in a function
like MD-5, especially when you use the "XMD5" feature in FTP as
heavily as I do. I also have plans to use the MD5 machinery as the
basis of a strong cipher (not over amateur frequencies, naturally) so
speed is again important.
Phil
------------------------------
Date: 25 Jun 93 12:43:51 GMT
From: Jon Jagger <J.R.Jagger@sheffield-hallam.ac.uk>
Subject: UI vs I, datagram vs vc mode
To: tcp-group@ucsd.edu
Hi,
I've been reading a few docs and am slightly confused.
Once source says
"...Because of this vc on TCP/IP is overkill. Better to use the
datagram mode and use UI frames"
Another says
"AX.25 v2.1 provides. One large IP datagram is fragmented into a
series of paclen sized AX.25 segments, one per I-frame"
I thought that the paclen parameter did not apply in datagram mode.
Before I read these two I was sure this was what happened.
datagram mode. AX.25 v2.1
Large IP datagram is not fragmented at the IP level. Instead is
is fragmented at the link level, into a series of paclen I frames.
The major benefit being that a lost IP datagram fragment does not
require retransmitting all the fragments of that IP datagram, and
you do not have the overhead of an IP header on every AX.25 I frame.
But now I'm not so sure. Can anyone enlighten me.
Thanks
JJ
:: Jon Jagger , Sheffield Hallam University, S1 1WB, UK
:: Work J.R.Jagger@shu.ac.uk Home 2E1BSD (44.131.2.111)
:: Tel 0742 533802/432889 (work/home) Fax 0743 533840
:: Newspaper ad: Men wanted for expanding contracting company!
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 25 Jun 93 10:56:42 GMT
From: jbloom@arrl.org (Jon Bloom KE3Z)
Subject: UNIX and NEC2
To: bw@cs.ecok.edu
I've been trying to make NEC run under SCO UNIX, and am "almost
there". I am missing some library functions that SCO doesn't
provide. Looks like they are all trivial, but I don't know
for sure what some of them are supposed to do. Could anyone
e-mail me some man pages (or source) for these things ?
Bill -- There was a shar file posted to r.r.a.misc some time ago.
I'm mailing a copy of the posting to you in a separate message.
Anyone else who wants it, let me know.
------
Jon Bloom, KE3Z | jbloom@arrl.org
American Radio Relay League |
225 Main St., Newington CT 06111 |
------------------------------
End of TCP-Group Digest V93 #165
******************************
******************************