In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 01/20/2006
at 08:42 PM, Chris Mason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>You need to read section 10.5 The SYSREQ Function of RFC 2355 in
>order to know why this discussion is taking place.
I took a look at RFC 2355, and see several disturbing things. First,
thewre is a lot of text that uses lower case instead of RFC 2119
language. I don't know whether "should" means "SHOULD", "MUST" or
neither. Specifically, does
- if the user transmits anything other than LOGOFF, the server
should respond with the string "COMMAND UNRECOGNIZED" to the
client. The server should not send anything to the host
application on behalf of the client.
Really mean
- if the user transmits anything other than LOGOFF, the server
SHOULD respond with the string "COMMAND UNRECOGNIZED" to the
client. The server SHOULD NOT send anything to the host
application on behalf of the client.
? If it does, then there is some wiggle room. OTOH, there is no wiggle
room if it really means
- if the user transmits anything other than LOGOFF, the server
MUST respond with the string "COMMAND UNRECOGNIZED" to the
client. The server MUST NOT send anything to the host
application on behalf of the client.
IAC, it might be appropriate to submit comments to the IETF on this
and other issues, e.g., sessions whose primary size is not 24x80.
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
ISO position; see <http://patriot.net/~shmuel/resume/brief.html>
We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress.
(S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
