Hi Rob, [Replying to a post which didn't distribute fully...]

About "Pure DOS TelNet ZMoDem" of October 16:

Have you setup gkermit... ...synchro.net/docs/kermit.txt

...i wonder if you will agree to remove all mentions relative to me
on `SynchroNet's ~WEB~ site... ...it makes more sense to just point
at the UpDate: http://public.sogetel.net/bicephale/MSK.INI

Sure, no problem. Unfortunatley, this .INI file is not a "drop-in" replacement for the kermit.ini I've provided for Synchronet sysops.

It appears you got much more than just a Drop-In Replacement issue:

__________________________________________________[ `Kermit.TXT v1.5' ]_

These instructions are specifically not authorized, approved,

RS} condoned, or verified by Michel Samson, the self-appointed Kermit
RS} expert and evangelist. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
This single sentence is flawed, just like the rest. The person who
could request action regarding Winston Smith is Winston Smith himself so
i have to wonder: did he ask not to be associated with this SABOTAGE as
well?! As for being a `Kermit' expert, i wouldn't impose myself as some "Fluff" expert OVER NIGHT, i wouldn't need to advertise my feelings on a
~WEB~ site kept under my exclusive CONTROL... nor would i let a hurd of no-names stand behind and shout! Here, being "Self-Appointed" means i'm choosing my own challenges; any authority over a `Kermit' install topic
is given to me by those who appreciate that my promotion of `Kermit' has involved no less than eight SysOps, at a rate of about 1.3 SysOp a year.

Regarding your "Evangelist" token, some readers might ask who's who
in the long run! You're favourite game is "break the toys of others" so
my quote below, from `Kermit.UPD', "GENERAL SETUP" (26.2), euh... would
sound quite appropriate at this time: "Kermit commands appearing in the
BBS's MSKERMIT.INI file might be..." - yes, read MIGHT as in OPTIONAL or SUGGESTED - why keep refering to it, euh... almost "religiously" then?!

...incompatible with Wayne Warthen's `Kermit for Windows'...

...this point is moot. ...no "transfer recovery" is possible.

What's "moot" is your decision not to take into account suggestions
such as the following which comes from `Kermit.UPD' (same 26.2 section):

The BBS software should invoke MS-DOS Kermit with "command-
line arguments", i.e. commands to be executed, given on the
same line... If you need to issue more commands than will fit
on the command line, simply collect them into a file, and then

invoke Kermit with a TAKE command... Communication parameters
should be given on the Kermit command line for each session,

along with the file transfer commands. Real Kermit... ...can
be configured automatically by the BBS software provided the
caller has "set terminal apc on" to enable this feature. The
BBS software can then set the optimal file transfer parameters
in calling Kermit program, and also initiate up- and downloads
automatically. Read section 10, THE APC ESCAPE SEQUENCE...

`Kermit' as installed on `SBBS/W32' is real SABOTAGE; `Kermit.UPD'
shows macro examples in this very same passage (26.2) and yet i've never
seen any macro in your own .INI setup versions, which is coherent with a
lack of experience - and objectivity - to say the least! :( Your over- simplified setup makes it COMPLICATED to create any `Kermit.INI' Drop-In Replacement which would render `Kermit' as "straightforward" as `ZMoDem' otherwise - and it makes the *1* `Win-16/32' FreeWare client USELESS!...
^^^^^^^^
That's only a sample of what you chose to ignore, i have a few more features waiting. Oh, by the way... I meant D/L Recovery for *BBSers*!

Self-centered SysOps would wait long enough for the fog to clear up
and remind themselves that no users will be left to argue, eventually...

In the meantime, even if BBSers living in remote locations can hope
for High-Speed INet access, someday, i have to warn against `Kermit.INI'
since it imposes your own preference ("Send" vs "ReSend") and `WWKfW-16/
32' is made to hang the session! This situation lasted for over a year,
who did this SABOTAGE serve, exactly?... Yes, our whole lives are moot,
but BBSers must be FREE to evaluate `Kermit' for their own, nonetheless.

Character Translation which makes it possible to use ~ASCII~ UpLoad
for pre-writen text from a foreign environment isn't available.

Perhaps we have different definitions of "ASCII Upload", but my
definition is just raw ASCII, terminated by a Ctrl-Z char usually.

I'd call it ~ASCII~ UpLoad on *ONE* side only, obviously. I repeat
the request that you remove my name from your ~WEB~ site including here: ________________________________________________________________________

http://cvs.synchro.net/cgi-bin/viewcvs.cgi/*checkout*/docs/kermit.txt http://cvs.synchro.net/cgi-bin/viewcvs.cgi/*checkout*/exec/kermit.ini http://cvs.synchro.net/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/~checkout~/exec/kermit.ini http://synchro.net/docs/kermit.txt

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
In addition, my late revision built from what you rejected is here:

http://public.sogetel.net/bicephale/MSK.INI

Should you ever come to care to open the door to long-term projects
(like to include Bidirectional Drop-File support, `DSZLog' compatibility
being one way to allow cps statistics, for example), euh... you'd adopt
my well-planed `MSK.INI' approach sooner or later so it just makes sense
to add this other link too (no comment required, it's SELF-DOCUMENTARY):

http://public.sogetel.net/bicephale/Vert-801.QWK.ZIP (284 Kb)

Salutations,

Michel Samson
a/s Bicephale


... `MS-DOS v7.10a'+`LSPPP v0.8'+`RLFossil v1.23'+`MS-Kermit v3.15 Med.'
___ MultiMail/MS-DOS v0.45 - Trying to make TelNet OLMR BBSing UNIVERSAL
--- Maximus/2 3.01
* Origin: COMM Port OS/2 juge.com 204.89.247.1 (281) 980-9671 (1:106/2000)

Re: SBBS/W32 Kermit SABOTAGE
By: Michel Samson to Rob Swindell on Tue Oct 19 2004 05:07 am

About "Pure DOS TelNet ZMoDem" of October 16:

Have you setup gkermit... ...synchro.net/docs/kermit.txt

...i wonder if you will agree to remove all mentions relative to me
on `SynchroNet's ~WEB~ site... ...it makes more sense to just point
at the UpDate: http://public.sogetel.net/bicephale/MSK.INI

Sure, no problem. Unfortunatley, this .INI file is not a "drop-in" replacement for the kermit.ini I've provided for Synchronet sysops.

It appears you got much more than just a Drop-In Replacement issue:

__________________________________________________[ `Kermit.TXT v1.5' ]_

These instructions are specifically not authorized, approved,

RS} condoned, or verified by Michel Samson, the self-appointed Kermit
RS} expert and evangelist. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
This single sentence is flawed, just like the rest. The person who could request action regarding Winston Smith is Winston Smith himself so
i have to wonder: did he ask not to be associated with this SABOTAGE as well?!

The sentence you quoted has nothing to do with Winston Smith. Why are you bringing any innocent bystander into this?

Regarding your "Evangelist" token, some readers might ask who's who
in the long run! You're favourite game is "break the toys of others" so
my quote below, from `Kermit.UPD', "GENERAL SETUP" (26.2), euh... would sound quite appropriate at this time: "Kermit commands appearing in the BBS's MSKERMIT.INI file might be..." - yes, read MIGHT as in OPTIONAL or SUGGESTED -

Indeed. If I thought they weren't optional, I would've included all the options listed in the file. You don't need to teach me how to read a document.

why keep refering to it, euh... almost "religiously" then?!

I only refer to it once, in my kermit.ini file. I have no idea what you're talking about. If anyone "keeps referring" to thing "religiously", it's you, you weirdo.

...incompatible with Wayne Warthen's `Kermit for Windows'...

...this point is moot. ...no "transfer recovery" is possible.

What's "moot" is your decision not to take into account suggestions such as the following which comes from `Kermit.UPD' (same 26.2 section):

The BBS software should invoke MS-DOS Kermit with "command-
line arguments", i.e. commands to be executed, given on the
same line... If you need to issue more commands than will fit
on the command line, simply collect them into a file, and then

invoke Kermit with a TAKE command... Communication parameters
should be given on the Kermit command line for each session,

Why should I bother with the "TAKE" command? The "-f kermit.ini" option works just fine. Why don't *you* remove the redundant "Set Port FOSSIL 1" from your command-lines and put it in your MSK.INI file instead? Then your command-lines would fit in the space alloted without requiring Mickey Mouse stunts like renaming `Kermit.EXE' as `MSK.EXE'

`Kermit' as installed on `SBBS/W32' is real SABOTAGE; `Kermit.UPD' shows macro examples in this very same passage (26.2) and yet i've never seen any macro in your own .INI setup versions, which is coherent with a lack of experience - and objectivity - to say the least! :(

OH MY GAWD, I DON'T HAVE ANY MACROS!?!? For shame. I must go create some immediately, or Michel will think I don't know what I'm doing!!!

Your over-
simplified setup makes it COMPLICATED to create any `Kermit.INI' Drop-In Replacement which would render `Kermit' as "straightforward" as `ZMoDem' otherwise - and it makes the *1* `Win-16/32' FreeWare client USELESS!...
^^^^^^^^

I'll have to download this client and test for my self someday. In the mean-time, HyperTerminal (FreeWare), and Kermit-95 works just fine.

That's only a sample of what you chose to ignore, i have a few more features waiting. Oh, by the way... I meant D/L Recovery for *BBSers*!

Self-centered SysOps would wait long enough for the fog to clear up
and remind themselves that no users will be left to argue, eventually...

blah blah blah

In the meantime, even if BBSers living in remote locations can hope
for High-Speed INet access, someday, i have to warn against `Kermit.INI' since it imposes your own preference ("Send" vs "ReSend")

If RESEND can be used in place of SEND, always, that's great. It's unclear from the kermit docs if this is the case. In your suggested configuration, you have 2 different command-lines for SEND and RESEND (yuck). File recovery should be the default mode (if the file exists) and the BBS should not require 2 different command-lines for the user to be able to resume an aborted download.

and `WWKfW-16/
32' is made to hang the session! This situation lasted for over a year,
who did this SABOTAGE serve, exactly?... Yes, our whole lives are moot,
but BBSers must be FREE to evaluate `Kermit' for their own, nonetheless.

Well if you want to point out the exact items in the KERMIT.TXT that prevent this from happening, please do so. Otherwise, leave me alone.

Character Translation which makes it possible to use ~ASCII~ UpLoad
for pre-writen text from a foreign environment isn't available.

Perhaps we have different definitions of "ASCII Upload", but my definition is just raw ASCII, terminated by a Ctrl-Z char usually.

I'd call it ~ASCII~ UpLoad on *ONE* side only, obviously.

I have no idea what you mean. Which side only? Both sides have to agree on the protocol used (or *no* protocol, in the case of "ASCII upload").

I repeat
the request that you remove my name from your ~WEB~ site including here:

Your request has been noted.

In addition, my late revision built from what you rejected is here:

http://public.sogetel.net/bicephale/MSK.INI

Should you ever come to care to open the door to long-term projects

I don't care to open the door to any projects (long-term or otherwise), if you are involved in them, but thanks for the offer!

digital man

Snapple "Real Fact" #180:
The first VCR was made in 1956 and was the size of a piano.

Hi Rob,

About "SBBS/W32 Kermit SABOTAGE" of October 19:

...you will agree to remove all mentions relative to me...

Sure, no problem.

It appears you got much more than just a Drop-In Replacement issue: `Kermit.TXT v1.5' "...Samson, the self-appointed Kermit expert
and evangelist". The person who could request action regarding
Winston Smith is Winston Smith himself so i have to wonder:
did he ask not to be associated with this SABOTAGE as well?!

The sentence you quoted has nothing to do with Winston Smith.

Are you sure? Check what you'll find simply by feeding Google with
this: "kermit.txt synchro.net". Don't tell me your memory just failed!

Or is it possible you don't understand plain English, or maybe it's
just bad faith?!! Lets point at what the quote from above really means.

BEFORE
__________________________________________________[ `Kermit.TXT v1.2' ]_

If you or your BBS users find Kermit support useful, you can thank

RS} Michel Samson and Winston Smith for their promotion of Kermit and

help with testing Kermit support in Synchronet.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
AFTER
__________________________________________________[ `Kermit.TXT v1.5' ]_

These instructions are specifically not authorized, approved,

RS} condoned, or verified by Michel Samson, the self-appointed Kermit
RS} expert and evangelist. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Were you so upset you couldn't care less about what you had cut and
what it was replaced with? You're a bad looser and you prefer to ignore anything comming from me because your LOOSE `Kermit' install makes holes
in the `SynchroNet/W32' BBSes which is as big as the Grand Canyon! Yes,
we do agree on the victim... but not on who's temper has made him such!

Why are you bringing any innocent bystander into this?

The question is WHY DID YOU and i know the answer all too well: it
was too tempting to remove it all and replace this text with your venom!

Regarding your "Evangelist" token... `Kermit.UPD'... ...(26.2)...

You don't need to teach me how to read a document. If anyone "keeps referring" to things "religiously", it's you, you weirdo.

Hummm... What juvenile game is it, the game of "i said it first"?!

...Michel will think I don't know what I'm doing!!!

I know what you've been doing for over a year, actually: SABOTAGE.

Your over-simplified setup makes it COMPLICATED... ...it makes the
*1* `Win-16/32' FreeWare client USELESS!...

I'll have to download this client and test for my self someday.

Please, spare me the need to count how many times i wrote about it!

...HyperTerminal (FreeWare), and Kermit-95 works just fine.

State your claim in cps terms and we'll see what "just fine" means!

Self-centered SysOps would wait long enough for the fog to clear...
blah blah blah

I know you have that much to say about the subject, which is why my numerous mentions about Wayne Warthen's `Kermit for Windows' finally get
your alledged attention, euh... something like fourteen months later!!!

...you have 2 different command-lines for SEND and RESEND (yuck).

The SysOp gets much more than that as an extra, he also finds a way
which is meant to help him in debugging `Kernmit' locally, etc., etc. I suggest a PRE-EMPTIVE setup which leaves this CHOICE to SysOps... Yours
is one of a control freak and the SysOps must search for help elsewhere!

...point out the exact items... Otherwise, leave me alone.

Let me remind you that YOU are the one who made contact with me and
i clearly stated that your intervention wasn't welcome. You insisted by
trying to move the discussion in the `SynchroNet SysOps' area where your disciples were waiting to take over and obscure the `Kermit' topic using
more personal attacks - oh, and they like to believe they can attack 1st
(as a hurd) while their target is expected to behave, like a victim! It
seems you only retain the few words which lead to more controversy and i
can't hope for all my explanations to be heard, LEAVE ME ALONE YOURSELF.

Here are EXACT items: http://public.sogetel.net/bicephale/MSK.INI

Perhaps we have different definitions of "ASCII Upload"...

I'd call it ~ASCII~ UpLoad on *ONE* side only, obviously.

I have no idea what you mean. Which side only?

There's no hope for you: you're quick to forget, slow to follow...

I repeat the request that you remove my name from your ~WEB~ site...

Your request has been noted.

As i comment above: you claim to acknowledge but you'll ignore it.

Salutations,

Michel Samson
a/s Bicephale


... Rob's SBBS/Kermit: spend spare-time just to prove he might be wrong
-!- MultiMail/MS-DOS v0.45 - Trying to make TelNet OLMR BBSing UNIVERSAL
--- Mail-ennium/32 v2.0-beta-r1
* Origin: Mail-ennium/32 v2 Beta Coming Soon! (1:379/1200.0)

Re: SBBS/W32 Kermit SABOTAGE
By: MICHEL SAMSON to ROB SWINDELL on Wed Oct 20 2004 12:35 am

...point out the exact items... Otherwise, leave me alone.

Let me remind you that YOU are the one who made contact with me

No, it was *you* who posted *my name* in this echo.

and
i clearly stated that your intervention wasn't welcome. You insisted by trying to move the discussion in the `SynchroNet SysOps' area

Uh, no, that was *you*. I don't move messages or discussions between areas.
You do (or at least someone posting as "Michel Samson"). Perhaps you have multiple personality disorder?

digital man

Snapple "Real Fact" #70:
A "jiffy" is actually 1/100 of a second.

Re: SBBS/W32 Kermit SABOTAGE
By: MICHEL SAMSON to ROB SWINDELL on Tue Oct 19 2004 23:35:00

Let me remind you that YOU are the one who made contact with me and
i clearly stated that your intervention wasn't welcome. You insisted by trying to move the discussion in the `SynchroNet SysOps' area where your disciples were waiting to take over and obscure the `Kermit' topic using more personal attacks - oh, and they like to believe they can attack 1st
(as a hurd) while their target is expected to behave, like a victim! It seems you only retain the few words which lead to more controversy and i can't hope for all my explanations to be heard, LEAVE ME ALONE YOURSELF.

I think I'm the only one in there who can attack as a Hurd.
--- SBBSecho 2.10-FreeBSD
* Origin: FreeBSD Synchronet - telnet://FreeBSD.synchro.net (1:140/17)

Hi Rob,

About "SBBS/W32 Kermit SABOTAGE" of October 20:

...point out the exact items... Otherwise, leave me alone.

MS} ...YOU are the one who made contact... You insisted by trying to

move the discussion in the `SynchroNet SysOps' area where your
disciples were waiting to take over and obscure the `Kermit' topic
using more personal attacks... ...you only retain the few words
which lead to more controversy... LEAVE ME ALONE YOURSELF.

No, it was *you* who posted *my name* in this echo.

^^^^^^
No CONTACT there. My name is associated to your SABOTAGE since you
put it (read posted it) on your ~WEB~ site 14 months ago... What a poor attempt to distort reality, it's like this evangelist thing but you know
what? Evangelists return every Sunday and i've been very quiet about my promotion for a lot longer than a week! Lets check the chain of events:

____________________________________[ `Linux BBS', September 27, 2004 ]_

From Michel Samson to Andy Alt about "BBBS UpLoad":

http://fidonet.sensationcontent.com/echomail/linux_bbs/dece560207ffc3a6.html ____________________________________[ `Linux BBS', September 28, 2004 ]_

From Michel Samson to Maurice Kinal about "BBBS UpLoad":

http://fidonet.sensationcontent.com/echomail/linux_bbs/4723804a66064a90.html _________________________________________[ `Windows', October 3, 2004 ]_

From Michel Samson to Gregg Somes about " SBBS/W32 Kermit Install":

http://fidonet.sensationcontent.com/echomail/windows/6b87e2f6ba3744f8.html _______________________________________[ `Fido Util', October 5, 2004 ]_

From Michel Samson to Win-32 SysOps about "SBBS/W32 Kermit Setup":

http://fidonet.sensationcontent.com/echomail/fido_util/ea3e65b5f4965796.html ______________________________________[ `Fido Util', October 11, 2004 ]_

From ROB SWINDELL to MICHEL SAMSON about "SBBS/W32 Kermit Setup":

http://fidonet.sensationcontent.com/echomail/fido_util/ae182661df4c2ec6.html ______________________________________[ `Fido Util', October 12, 2004 ]_

From MICHEL SAMSON to ROB SWINDELL about "SBBS/W32 Kermit SABOTAGE":

http://fidonet.sensationcontent.com/echomail/fido_util/a45a83c398a620bd.html

You can't read a text correctly and you can't get the numbers right neither. YOU made contact 1st and YOU posted my name 1st as well, there
is no mistake possible: anyone but you can measure a 1 day interval, in
one case, and many many more in the other. I can't but notice it didn't
take much evangelism to get you and your holy army mobilized, anyway!...

Should i evaluate the proportion of On-Topic content that came from
your clan i'd be justified to say it was MEANT TO SILENCE THE PROMOTING.

...A long time ago, the author of `SynchroNet' made me post a
`Kermit' configuration-file only to reject it... As a result, it's
the 2nd time this year i hear of some BBS where the SysOp failed to
obtain suitable `Kermit' support... ...Wayne Warthen's `Kermit for Windows'... ...abort pronto and users have their session hanged...

I didn't "make" you do anything. If you have a suggested change to
the default kermit.ini included with Synchronet (and *not* a
completely new, totally different .ini file), then I'm all ears.

The challenge was a significant precursor of the whole intervention
and expressed one simple thought: let me continue to SABOTAGE `Kermit',
the fact that `Windows' BBSers got no suitable FreeWare client is "moot"
and a few hanged sessions will make both the SysOps & BBSers react badly
enough to get rid of `Kermit' once and for all, as you might have wrote!

%-b,

I don't move messages or discussions between areas.

I didn't suggest that we move to `Fido Util' before my reply to the
post you sent me on October 13, thinking i was reading from `Linux BBS'!

Perhaps you have multiple personality disorder?

Mind about your own. What disorder is it to claim `HyperTerminal's `Kermit' is "just fine" when its packets are 94 bytes *MAXIMUM* and .ZIP transfers crawl (19+ retries/second) at a whoping 500 cps rate?! I know better: a clean 12+ Kcps, under DOS! What sort of SysOp disorder is it
to pretend you can build a better .INI in a matter of hours when mine is attempting to implement Error Trapping (not even a `Kermit' thing) after
years of correspondance?! Where were you when i got my first test, boy?

What treatment does a SysOp require when he doesn't care his BBSers
can't return for a day because a session hanged and the time vanished in
in thin air?!! If you can't tolerate that i got to criticize your lousy `Kermit' setup just fix it up!... Don't bother to associate me with it.

...you will agree to remove all mentions relative to me...

Sure, no problem.

It appears you got much more than just a Drop-In Replacement issue: `Kermit.TXT v1.5' "...Samson, the self-appointed Kermit expert
and evangelist". The person who could request action regarding
Winston Smith is Winston Smith himself so i have to wonder: did he
ask not to be associated with this SABOTAGE as well?!

The sentence you quoted has nothing to do with Winston Smith.

Check what you'll find simply by feeding Google... "kermit.txt synchro.net". BEFORE ... AFTER ...you couldn't care less about
what you had cut... ...it was too tempting to remove it all...

Try http://public.sogetel.net/bicephale/MSK.INI and begin to paste!

Salutations,

Michel Samson
a/s Bicephale


... Rob's SBBS/Kermit: short-sighted moves and blind cutting gone wild!
-!- MultiMail/MS-DOS v0.45 - Numbers make BBSing UNIVERSAL, not sugar...
--- Mail-ennium/32 v2.0-beta-r1
* Origin: Mail-ennium/32 v2 Beta Coming Soon! (1:379/1200.0)

Hi Stephen,

About "Web access, false BBS ID" of November 3:

Support for a platform has to come from users of that platform.
However, he seems to want a free utility for DOS that does telnet,
http, ssh, https, rlogin and who knows what else. Because the only
free one he could find that handles telnet is Kermit, he then rips
into myself and DigitalMan for not supporting it in Synchronet.

Perhaps you should refrain from getting involved in a situation you
fail to understand: i REPEAT, the `MS-Kermit' terminal is OK on `SBBS', actually! %> But regarding my BBS UNIVERSALITY promotion, no 1st-timer
would gladly spend money on $hareWare he may not require soon, don't you think?... `MS-Kermit' is free but few newbies would know how to use it,
i believe; Wayne Warthen's `Kermit for Win-16/32' is free too but there
was a major issue, the last time i was able to try it on `SBBS' systems, including yours as i recall! By the way, `G-Kermit' doesn't seem ideal.

Rob Swindell FORCED eventual `Kermit' users to run $hareWare, which
isn't a suitable way to promote it as an alternative to `ZMoDem' at all.

Synchronet has NEVER had internal protocols.

Who says it has? It's no reason to SABOTAGE `Kermit', in any case!

So, DM whips up support for kermit, adds it to the default...

Yeah, "whips up" sounds right here, when i consider how little time
was spent - before he decided that this was FINAL by including it there!
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

...it turns out that MS wants something else...

The whole thread which took place over no more than a week is here:

http://public.sogetel.net/bicephale/Vert-801.QWK.ZIP (284 Kb)

I know better than you what i want and i've explained it in length.

He gets mad at DigitalMan for not spending hours configuring Kermit
exactly in the manner MS wants it.

Don't forget all the topic obstructions and insults i had to endure
while i repeated my request for basic setup information and i waited for answers... and also, that i *DID* warn about disabling `WWKfW-16/32'!!!

Yes, it works, yes, it's part of the default install, but it's not
the way MS wanted it. From there, MS gets mad at DM and I...

And you? So you feel concerned, after all?! Well, i'm sorry if it happens that `G-Kermit' isn't the best thing around but nothing i can do matters because the outcome was set more than a year ago - during a long
and hot summer. Yes, it fails, oh yes, and the fault isn't mine. There
is no way you can convince me that a `Kermit' which requires the user to
run a pure DOS setup helps to undo twenty years of SysOp pre-conceptions
and not even if he can spare the effort simply by $pending money, sorry!

...for moving to existing standards and not supporting him who is
using outdated non-standards on an unsupported OS.

Hummm... It's outstanding to observe how much attention you've put
into this, before you finally decided to jump in!!! You forgot `Kermit'
calls for a lot more than would be reasonable to discuss here, standards
my eye!... `MS-Kermit' is as standard as it can get and it's Columbia's
last *OFFICIAL* release - which is somewhat more mature than some `FDSZ' PROTOTYPE of May 1997 where the "-e" Escaping function doesn't even seem
to help in `SynchroNet' since it's not put there by default, i'm afraid!

Oh but, "Yurk", Rob said! Should this "-e" `FDSZ' item work, there probably would be a drop in speed due to the overhead and those who have
no problem with the present external `ZMoDem' setup would require that a
2nd `ZMoDem' item is added to the transfer menu instead. In MY opinion,
it's better to use what it takes and dismiss esthetical criterias! %-b,

As unsupported as it may be my DOS setup gets me `Kermit' transfers
as good as 13 Kcps - compared to 4-5 Kpcs - and i didn't try this with a
faster access just yet. I don't request your support, i provide my own!

Fifteen months have just past and they add to years of indifference
(a decade!) during which `MS-KERMIT' WAS READY FOR ~TELNET~ ALL ALONG...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
All you had to do was to read and wonder why my setup is like this:

http://public.sogetel.net/bicephale/MSK.INI

It's gone downhill from there.

Oh yes, that you can say! Down the drain with remarks about myself instead of my actions/topics, you `OverNet' guys got no lessons to give!

Anyway, don't forget: here's something you didn't care to try yet:

ftp://kermit.wwarthen.com/pub/KermWin/Files/v085/kw32v085.exe

Salutations,

Michel Samson
a/s Bicephale


P.S.: Take a look at the TearLine, from my previous post to Mark Lewis!


... Rob's SBBS/Kermit: spend spare-time just to prove he got it trashed
___ MultiMail/MS-DOS v0.45 - If only TelNet OLMR BBSing were *UNIVERSAL*
--- Maximus/2 3.01
* Origin: COMM Port OS/2 juge.com 204.89.247.1 (281) 980-9671 (1:106/2000)

Re: SBBS/W32 Kermit SABOTAGE
By: Michel Samson to Stephen Hurd on Thu Nov 04 2004 13:53:00

Fifteen months have just past and they add to years of indifference
(a decade!) during which `MS-KERMIT' WAS READY FOR ~TELNET~ ALL ALONG...

For some strange reason, MS-Kermit doesn't run on ANY of the systems comprising my BBS (FreeBSD, Linux with a 2.4 kernel, Linux with a 2.2 kernel, NetBSD, and OpenBSD) Synchronet on the other hand does, as does gkermit and ckermit.

Vert, the OFFICIAL Synchronet BBS includes one Linux system... again, for some odd reason, MS-Kermit fails to run correctly.

20: Rob Swindell FORCED eventual `Kermit' users to run $hareWare, which
21: isn't a suitable way to promote it as an alternative to `ZMoDem' at all.

Both GKermit and CKermit are free in a sense that MS-Kermit isn't. In fact, unless I misremember, MS-Kermit comes without any documentation whatsoever, and the manual costs something on the order of $45 US. Curious what $sharWare Rob "FORECED" kermit users to use. My goal isn't to promote Kermit as an alternative to ZModem, it's to support kermit users who for some reason cannot use ZModem. In my personal opinion, Kermit isn't a usefull alternative to ZModem for BBS use, and I have no interest whatsoever in promoting it in any way.

I am interested however in pointing out and correcting any misinformation you accidently or purposely post.
--- SBBSecho 2.10-FreeBSD
* Origin: FreeBSD Synchronet - telnet://FreeBSD.synchro.net (1:140/17)

Hi Stephen,

About "SBBS/W32 Kermit SABOTAGE" of November 4:

Support for a platform has to come from users of that platform.
However, he seems to want a free utility for DOS... ...the only
free one he could find that handles telnet is Kermit, he then rips

SH} into myself and DigitalMan for not supporting it in Synchronet.

...i REPEAT, the `MS-Kermit' terminal is OK on `SBBS'... ...`MS-
Kermit' is free but few newbies would know how to use it, i believe;
Wayne Warthen's `Kermit for Win-16/32' is free too but there was a
major issue, the last time i was able to try it on `SBBS' systems...
Rob Swindell FORCED eventual `Kermit' users to run $hareWare, which
isn't a suitable way to promote it as an alternative to `ZMoDem'...

...MS-Kermit comes without any documentation whatsoever, and the
manual costs something on the order of $45 US.

This text is taken from the .INI you managed not to read all along:

------------------------[ http://public.sogetel.net/bicephale/MSK.INI ]-
; ftp://kermit.columbia.edu/kermit/archives/msk314.zip

(677 Kb, November 7, 2002 - updated documentation)

.-^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Here's a tip, look for the magic word: "DOCUMENTATION"! Regarding
any book which is meant to $upport "The Team", i bought mine without any obligation; i NEVER use it for `Kermit' references so it's buried deep.

My goal isn't to promote Kermit as an alternative to ZModem, it's to support kermit users who for some reason cannot use ZModem.
...Kermit isn't a usefull alternative to ZModem for BBS use...

It explains why you ignore that only `Zap-O-Com' work$ by now. But
wait, does the nuanced sentence imply that i want `Kermit' to take over?
Well, it says it all!... You guys want to pose as decent people when an information, directly from the source, gets distorted even when it's put
under your nose! `Kermit' as installed on `SBBS' is plain *SABOTAGE*...

...MS gets mad at DM and I for moving to existing standards and

SH} not supporting... ...outdated non-standards...

`MS-Kermit' is as standard as it can get... ...my DOS setup gets me `Kermit' transfers as good as 13 Kcps - compared to 4-5 Kpcs...

MS} I don't request your support, i provide my own! Fifteen months have

just past and they add to years of indifference (a decade!) during
which `MS-KERMIT' WAS READY FOR ~TELNET~ ALL ALONG... All you had
to do was to read and wonder why my setup is like this: ...MSK.INI

...MS-Kermit doesn't run on ANY of the systems comprising my BBS

SH} ...FreeBSD, Linux... ...NetBSD, and OpenBSD...

Perhaps if you had read `MSK.INI' and paid attention to my 1st line
you would have noticed that it says: "`SBBS/W32' support for `Kermit'"!
^^^

Vert, the OFFICIAL Synchronet BBS includes one Linux system...
again, for some odd reason, MS-Kermit fails to run correctly.

You mean you expect DOS SoftWare to work perfectly in `Linux'? %-o

I suppose a visit to Columbia's site could help: the part where it
says `MS-Kermit' is for DOS is true... Using it elsewhere is an option,
don't hurt your head if it happens that `MS-Kermit' won't do for you; i
see nothing strange in the fact that you require a proper `BSD' flavour!

I am interested however in pointing out and correcting any
misinformation you accidently or purposely post.

Let me guess, "misinformation" like bragging in public about a lack
of support for `MS-Kermit' when even *MY* numbers say otherwise?! Well,
you can pretend that some sentences of mine aren't clear, like Andy Ball
did lately, but my posts are lengthy and there are enough of them for an average objective reader not to put words in my mouth which are just the opposite of what i express!!! I can't but notice that you and your guru
remain consistently silent relatively to the VERY WEAK INTERFACE between `SynchroNet' and `MS-Kermit' (on `SBBS/W32' BBS systems, mind you)! %-b

You guys correcting misinformation? Here's where it goes DownHill!

8-)

The farce is when you confess you intervein just because you've got
bored. Forget about the problem of finding a good ~IPv6~ stack for DOS, decades of `Kermit' pre-conceptions in your SysOp world should be enough
to thrive on controversy for two additional decades... MouHa! Ha! Ha!

8,-D ))

The deal has always been for a SysOp to provide me with information
about his BBS system since it's what he knows best and, once interfacing
with `Kermit' is done properly, to let ME handle any `Kermit' adjustment
which testing proves to be necessary. I rely on no subjetive criterias,
like "fluff" or any other exotic concepts; i need numbers, cps figures.

Want to discuss about real misinformation? Like when you argue i'm expecting hours of work from you and I ASKED FOR LESS INTERFERENCE? Try
this record collection - or read from Rob's BBS if he didn't erase this:

http://public.sogetel.net/bicephale/Vert-801.QWK.ZIP (284 Kb)

I have ignored Rob Swindell's `Kermit' SABOTAGE for over a year, in
hope the situation would improve somehow. I couldn't avoid the need for
an UpDate since at least two SysOps complained about Rob's setup lately,
not to mention the BBSers who are completely mystified by this SABOTAGE.

Salutations,

Michel Samson
a/s Bicephale


... Rob's SBBS/Kermit: spend spare-time just to prove he went DownHill!
--- MultiMail/MS-DOS v0.45 - Trying to make TelNet OLMR BBSing UNIVERSAL
* Origin: BBS Networks @ www.bbsnets.com 808-839-6036 (1:10/345)

Re: SBBS/W32 Kermit SABOTAGE
By: MICHEL SAMSON to STEPHEN HURD on Fri Nov 05 2004 08:06:00

I have ignored Rob Swindell's `Kermit' SABOTAGE for over a year, in hope the situation would improve somehow. I couldn't avoid the need for
an UpDate since at least two SysOps complained about Rob's setup lately,
not to mention the BBSers who are completely mystified by this SABOTAGE.

I still fail to see how including a setup that happens to do the job (ie: transfer files) using Kermit is a form of sabotage. It's been tested with Kermit95, C-Kermit and G-Kermit. I'm fairly certain that even you have managed to transfer files using that setup and MS-Kermit (note: This is based on memory, not fact of any sort) I'm *positive* that winston Smith... another MS0Kermit user has manager to transfer files using the Kermit protocol as included with Synchronet.

I'm still waiting to hear exactly what "$hareWare" Rob is "forcing" sysops to use.
--- SBBSecho 2.10-FreeBSD
* Origin: FreeBSD Synchronet - telnet://FreeBSD.synchro.net (1:140/17)

Hi Stephen (what now?...),

About "SBBS/W32 Kermit SABOTAGE" of November 5:

...the `MS-Kermit' terminal is OK on `SBBS'... ...`MS-Kermit' is
free but few newbies would know how to use it... Wayne Warthen's

MS} `Kermit for Win-16/32' is free too but there was a major issue...
SH} ...MS-Kermit comes without any documentation whatsoever...

This text is taken from the .INI you managed not to read all along: "ftp://kermit.columbia.edu/kermit/archives/msk314.zip (677 Kb,

MS} November 7, 2002 - updated documentation)" ...information, directly

from the source, gets distorted even when it's put under your nose!

SH} ...MS-Kermit doesn't run on ANY of the systems comprising my BBS...

Perhaps if you had read `MSK.INI' and paid attention to my 1st line

MS} you would have noticed that it says: "`SBBS/W32' support...

It's been tested with Kermit95, C-Kermit and G-Kermit.

I'm the one who'll do misinformation? And topic steering perhaps?!

Refrain from using absolutes when memory fails!!! You're unable to comment over free `Windows' SoftWare with suitable `Kermit' support just because you didn't test any. *I* did, yet here you are! You read about
how rare the FREE and suitable `Windows' clients happen to be, long ago:
^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
___________________________ [ "Kermit preconceptions" - July 24, 2003 ]_

There is a Windows version... I think (but am not sure) that

SH} the Windows version is not available without paying for it.

`K95' (Columbia's *OFFICIAL* `Kermit' SoftWare for `W32' platforms)
is available for a 21 days free trial period, `C-Kermit' is no `Windows' product and `G-Kermit' much less! Was this a topic-steering attempt?...

8-7

I'm fairly certain that even you have managed to transfer files
using that setup and MS-Kermit... ...This is based on memory...

The following is based on FACTS I'VE OBSERVED MYSELF: "...the `MS- Kermit' terminal is OK on `SBBS'...", how could you forget my statement?
^^^^^^^^
THIS APPEARED ON YOUR SCREEN RIGHT WHEN YOU WERE POSTING THE REPLY!
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
%-b,

Time-travel tourism isn't for you, it makes one dizzy after a time!

8,-D ))

Seriously, what words or language must i use to prevent distortions
and topic-steering? Go to the records, i already suggested you read it.

I'm *positive* that Winston Smith... another MS-Kermit user, has
managed to transfer files using the Kermit protocol as included...

I'm very well aware of the situation since i contacted Rob Swindell
on Winston's advice and submitted my .INI, as a result. `Windows' tests failed, `Kermit.INI' lacked clarity, Swindell became irrational and then
many SysOps managed to disable `Kermit' (user UpLoads) somewhat later...

I'm still waiting to hear exactly what "$hareWare" Rob is "forcing"

SH} sysops to use.

Forcing who!? You're another 80 years old senile man or something?

%->

Talk about misinformation accidently or purposely posted! Lets see
what was on the menu lately (and which you carefully ignored, actually):

I am interested however in pointing out and correcting any
misinformation you accidently or purposely post.

...you and your guru remain consistently silent relatively to the

MS} VERY WEAK INTERFACE between `SynchroNet' and `MS-Kermit'

(on `SBBS/W32' BBS systems, mind you)! ...misinformation? Like
when you argue i'm expecting hours of work from you and I ASKED FOR

MS} LESS INTERFERENCE? I have ignored Rob Swindell's `Kermit' SABOTAGE

for over a year... I couldn't avoid the need for an UpDate since at
least two SysOps complained about Rob's setup lately, not to mention
the BBSers who are completely mystified by this SABOTAGE.

I still fail to see how including a setup that happens to do the
job (ie: transfer files) using Kermit is a form of sabotage.

I still fail to see what justifies your obvious voluntary blindness
when i return to some posts you published on `DoveNet', not so long ago:

________________________________ [ "SBBS & MS-Kermit" - July 23, 2003 ]_

Most other protocols are designed to work only on certain kinds or qualities of connections, and/or between certain kinds of computers,
and therefore work poorly (or not at all) elsewhere and offer few if
any methods to adapt to unplanned-for situations. Kermit, on the
other hand, allows you to achieve successful file transfer and the
highest possible performance on any given connection. HyperTerminal supports Kermit. Haven't tried it with HyperTerminal though...

I already explained where the sabotage is: `Hyper-Terminal' (which
is included in `Win-32') can make `Kermit' transfers at least twenty-six
times slower than they should be while Wayne Warthen's `Kermit for `Win-
16/32' (which is FreeWare) just hangs the session and reveals how *WEAK* `SBBS's *INTERFACE* to external (`Kermit') protocol drivers can be! So, `Kermit.INI' by Swindell does the job: a `SynchroNet/W32' SABOTAGE job.
^^^
Salutations,

Michel Samson
a/s Bicephale


... Rob's SBBS/Kermit: spend spare-time to discover a form of SABOTAGE!
--- MultiMail/MS-DOS v0.45 - Who will make TelNet OLMR BBSing UNIVERSAL?
* Origin: BBS Networks @ www.bbsnets.com 808-839-6036 (1:10/345)

Hi everybody,

About "Microsoft 0wnz U!" of November 6:

Sometimes a SysOp who pretends to correct misinformation happens to
open the door to more misinformation, as for the following text & ~URL~:

Microsoft will now allow you all to use... ... Kermit ...

http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/randz/protocol/royalty_free_protocol_license_agreement.asp

Quoting the whole text for better clarity was hardly appropriate in
a case where it called for even more misleading content, most obviously: ________________________________________________________________________ Published Protocols And Royalty-Free License
HyperTerminal Kermit File Transfer ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kermit allows the following types of file transfers:

One file can be transmitted per session.
Kermit file data is transmitted in data blocks of 100 bytes or less.
A Kermit receiver acknowledges each data packet.
Kermit error detection supports check sum error checking.
An aborted Kermit file transfer must be restarted from the beginning of
the file.

...

HyperTerminal Xmodem File Transfer, HyperTerminal Ymodem File Transfer,
and HyperTerminal Zmodem File Transfer are later file transfer protocol implementations intended to provide greater throughput than the
HyperTerminal Kermit File Transfer protocol. They support larger data
packets and reduce the number of acknowledgement packets that must be transmitted. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
If one goes to the source he'll find somewhat different statements:

- Standard Up-to-Date `Kermit' supports Batch-Mode sessions.
- Standard Up-to-Date `Kermit' packets are 9024 bytes or less.
- Standard Up-to-Date `Kermit' supports the "Streaming" mode.
- Standard Up-to-Date `Kermit' Type 3 16-Bits ~CRC~ (CCITT)
CheckSum used with "Set Transfer CRC On" lowers the error
rate by 600 parts in 10E15 (0.0000000000006).
- Standard Up-to-Date `Kermit' supports Transfer Recovery.
- `HyperTerminal's `Kermit' is at least twenty-six times
slower than the Standard Up-to-Date `Kermit' which allows
adaptation to most situations, including harsh noisy media.

Read MicroSoft's implicit admission where `HyperTerminal's `Kermit'
barely meets the 1985 `Kermit' sub-standard (with its lungs ripped off):

http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/randz/protocol/hyperterminal_kermit_file_transfer.asp

Salutations,

Michel Samson
a/s Bicephale
http://public.sogetel.net/bicephale/


... Sometimes, the cost of new features is too high, really! Is it not?
--- MultiMail/MS-DOS v0.45 - Trying to make TelNet OLMR BBSing UNIVERSAL
* Origin: BBS Networks @ www.bbsnets.com 808-839-6036 (1:10/345)

Re: SBBS/W32 Kermit SABOTAGE
By: MICHEL SAMSON to STEPHEN HURD on Sat Nov 06 2004 10:01:00

I already explained where the sabotage is: `Hyper-Terminal' (which
is included in `Win-32') can make `Kermit' transfers at least twenty-six times slower than they should be while Wayne Warthen's `Kermit for `Win- 16/32' (which is FreeWare) just hangs the session and reveals how *WEAK* `SBBS's *INTERFACE* to external (`Kermit') protocol drivers can be! So, `Kermit.INI' by Swindell does the job: a `SynchroNet/W32' SABOTAGE job.

Ok, let me see if I understand what you're saying then...
1) Hyperterminal does kermit poorly.
2) Wayne Warthen's "Kermit for Win-16/32" does not interoperate correctly with some other unspecified kermit implemenation.
3) Because of these facts, Rob has shown himself to be purposely breaking "kermit" because the interface is somehow "weak"

It's well know that Hyperterminals Kermit implementation is terrible... it's a least common denominator implementation that frankly sucks. Every other protocol implemented in Hyterminal works better than the poor crippled kermit they include.

I have no data on Wayne Warthen's implementation.

I ignore anything I'm not interested in arguing about... learn to deal with it.

I'm not sure exactly what you mean by accusing my of topic steering... I talk about things which interest me, and don't talk about things that dont. Mostly, this is because I'm not being paid to talk to you.

The interference which you ask Rob to stop consists of including support for Kermit file transfers by default with Synchronet. Your purpose as I understand it is to get everyone to support kermit. Even if you grant that the particular configuration Rob includes is somehow flawed, it gives you the oppurtunity to tell Sysops "Hey, I notice you have Kermit as a file transfer option... here's how you fix it" People are much more interested in fixing something that happens to be broken than adding something they don't understand the need for.

time after time, when you made a specific point about a valid problem with the Kermit support, it has been corrected in the default install... your goal as the kermit evangelist is apparently not to get a working kermit implementation on as many BBSs as possible, but to get YOUR WAY of having a working kermit implementation on as many BBSs as you can contact. There may be a basic misunderstanding occuring here... all that is needed is plain and simple instructions detailing the correct way to get kermit working in a default Synchronet install. Ones that verifyably work and manage to do something the existing one doesn't. If Rob won't commit those changes, I'd be willing to do it for you. I realise I'm speaking for Rob here, but I believe I can state firmly that neither one of us is interested in carrying on a running battle on FIDONet (I deduce this from the fact that Rob hasn't piped up lately).

I'll extend the offer once again... provide simple instructions for getting Kermit to work with Synchronet... they will be included with a default install of Synchronet... all the SysOp will have to do is add the protocol driver.

If you are not interested in having them included with Synchronet, stop ragging on the Synchronet people for not doing that, and blindly including a broken kermit install. We are not knowingly sabatoging kermit. Honest. It's the truth. We are intested in including support for Kermit with Synchronet. honest. It's the truth. If it's actually broken, we will fix it. Honest. it's the truth. However, we're NOT going to spend days plugging away at it. You do... share your knoledge with us.
--- SBBSecho 2.10-FreeBSD
* Origin: FreeBSD Synchronet - telnet://FreeBSD.synchro.net (1:140/17)

Re: SBBS/W32 Kermit SABOTAGE
By: MICHEL SAMSON to ALL on Sun Nov 07 2004 10:16:00

Hi everybody,

About "Microsoft 0wnz U!" of November 6:

Sometimes a SysOp who pretends to correct misinformation happens to open the door to more misinformation, as for the following text & ~URL~:

Microsoft will now allow you all to use... ... Kermit ...

http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/randz/proto

Quoting the whole text for better clarity was hardly appropriate in
a case where it called for even more misleading content, most obviously:

Perhaps you missed the generous slathering of sarcasm I spread on that message... and the implied criticism of Microsoft. You are offering a GPL incompatible licence to use protocols they didn't develop or have an IP rights with. Some of those standards are even older than Microsoft.

Microsoft IS ON THAT PAGE offering you the right to implement the Kermit protocol in your program...

Apparently there's yet another misunderstanding here.

*sigh*
--- SBBSecho 2.10-FreeBSD
* Origin: FreeBSD Synchronet - telnet://FreeBSD.synchro.net (1:140/17)

Hello, Stephen.

On 08 Nov 04 at 20:01, Stephen Hurd wrote to MICHEL SAMSON:

we're NOT going to spend days plugging away at it. You do... share
your knoledge with us.

If you're interested, I can try to translate a setup I have that works with Maximus for Synchronet... shouldn't be too hard. In fact, here's what I have:

Protocol Kermit
Type Batch
% ; Type Errorlevel
% ; Type Bi
Type Opus
%
LogFile Kermit%K.Log
ControlFile Kermit%K.Ctl
DownloadCmd Kermit.Exe -p%p -b%W -t%k -m%d -f%D -r%t Kermit%K.Ctl
UploadCmd Kermit.Exe -p%p -b%W -t%k -m%d -f%D -r%t Kermit%K.Ctl
DownloadString Send %s
UploadString Get %s
DownloadKeyword Sent
UploadKeyword Got
FilenameWord 1
DescriptWord 4
End Protocol

...that's verbatim from the Maximus PROTOCOL.CTL file.

The command line parameters:

%p The current port number (0=COM1, 1=COM2, and so on). Note that this
is 0-port based...

%W The "steady baud rate," as passed via the -s command line parameter. (I think it's the DCE)

%k The current node number. ("0" means no node number.)

%d The current message area name.

%D The current file area name.

%t The amount of time the user has left (in minutes).

%K The current node number in hexadecimal format, padded with leading zero to make it two characters. ("00" for no task number.)

If you want the actual KERMIT.EXE, let me know and I'll send it to you (it's DOS). Hope this helps.

Later,
Sean

// hausmaus@darktech.org | http://midnightshour.org | AIM: eekahausmaus
--- GoldED+/W32 1.1.5-21011
* Origin: Stranded at the Outpost... (1:18/200)

Hi Stephen,

About "SBBS/W32 Kermit SABOTAGE" of November 8:

...pointing out and correcting any misinformation...

...you and your guru remain consistently silent relatively to the
VERY WEAK INTERFACE between `SynchroNet' and `MS-Kermit'... ...misinformation? ...I ASKED FOR LESS INTERFERENCE... I couldn't
avoid the need for an UpDate since at least two SysOps complained
about Rob's setup lately, not to mention the BBSers...

I still fail to see how including a setup that happens to do the
job (ie: transfer files) using Kermit is a form of sabotage.

I already explained where the sabotage is: `Hyper-Terminal'...
...can make `Kermit' transfers at least twenty-six times slower...
...Wayne Warthen's `Kermit for `Win-16/32'... ...just hangs the
session and reveals how *WEAK* `SBBS's *INTERFACE* to external
(`Kermit') protocol drivers can be! ...SABOTAGE...

1) Hyperterminal does kermit poorly.

Right, the reference to MicroSoft only confirmed how archaic it is.

2) Wayne Warthen's "Kermit for Win-16/32" does not interoperate
correctly with some other unspecified kermit implementation.

Yes and no... The other implementation is well identified as there
was no `SBBS/W32' testing with an external file-transfer protocol driver
other than `MS-Kermit'; it only seems appropriate to compensate for the
lack of versatility in `WWKfW-16/32' by using a proper *BBS SIDE* setup.

3) Because of these facts, Rob has shown himself to be purposely
breaking "kermit" because the interface is somehow "weak".

Wrong, he's been warned of the consequences of rejecting my .INI on
1st sight and hence his decision made him responsible for disabling some
of the `Kermit' features - SysOps & BBSers *DID* complain because of his
own draft, nonetheless... I also informed him that hanged sessions fail
to be detected (the "CARRIER" signal may be stuck), that message-pointer UpDating may be wrong and/or that users are at risk to be kept out of an
`SBBS' system for a day. This matter of a weak external protocol-driver interface only makes things worst as he won't even try to address it but `Kermit' was made crippled because of "fluff" he has rejected, actually.

It's well know that Hyperterminals Kermit... ...frankly sucks.

That's because a BBSer simply can't access his `Kermit' parameters.

Every other protocol implemented in Hyterminal works better...

That may be true now but i observed a strange improvement using the
old `OS/2' version with `VSPD XP v4' in a `W32' DOS box, to be honest...

It reminds me that someone commented about old stuff working better
when mixed together, a long time ago (`C-Kermit v5A(189)' is from 1993).

I have no data on Wayne Warthen's implementation. I ignore anything
I'm not interested in arguing about... Learn to deal with it.

^^^^^^^
I can't expect excuses for your sustained objections, you mean?!...

Preliminary tests shown it can fly at over 25K7 cps (and my limited HardWare/SoftWare may be causing a slow-down). It's a mid-nineties 3rd-
party version where the `Kermit' packet-size is a thousand bytes at best
but which also happens to support Type 3 ~CRC~ error detection/handling.

Rob Swindell FORCED eventual `Kermit' users to run $hareWare...

...MS-Kermit comes without any documentation whatsoever...

I'm the one who'll do misinformation? And topic steering perhaps?!

I'm still waiting to hear exactly what "$hareWare" Rob is "forcing"
sysops to use.

Forcing who!?

I'm not sure exactly what you mean by accusing me of topic
steering... I talk about things which interest me...

When i wrote about "`Kermit' users" you argued about documentation,
when i reminded you that the documentation is available you made it look
like i had wrote something about forcing SysOps. I'm allergic to what i
call systematic topic obstruction or steering since little will come out
of it, usually. I just notice nothing significant emerged in your case.

Mostly, this is because I'm not being paid to talk to you.

Hummm... Sounds like deja vu - you must have seen my post to Andy!

The interference which you ask Rob to stop consists of including...

^^^^^^^^^
Bad guess again: it consists in REJECTING the contribution of many
users and SysOps who worked together before he posed as the only expert.

...gives you the opportunity to tell... ...here's how you fix it...

I already submitted my .INI to the attention of `SynchroNet' SysOps
many times, including Gregg Somes ("SBBS/W32 Kermit install", October 3)
who had a peculiar/typical `DoveNet' way to express his appreciation!...

Time after time... Your goal as the kermit evangelist is...

Here it goes again about evangelism!!! Well, you fail to take note
that going back to the "Send" command DISABLES Transfer Recovery, that a
few more retries make `Kermit' aborts SLOWER, that it's about Rob's ego-
trip and that the preaching is when he mocks users on sites HE controls.

Salutations,

Michel Samson
a/s Bicephale


... Rob's SBBS/Kermit: spend spare-time just to find out why his sucks!
--- MultiMail/MS-DOS v0.45 - Who will make TelNet OLMR BBSing UNIVERSAL?
* Origin: BBS Networks @ www.bbsnets.com 808-839-6036 (1:10/345)

Hi Stephen,

About "SBBS/W32 Kermit setup" of November 9:

...here's my late revision of the .INI Rob Swindell rejected...

When there's a "Ready-Made kit" please let us know...

Pouha! Ha! You are just perfectly - no, "honestly" - predictable!

8,-D ))

`MSK.INI' was more "Ready-Made" in 2003 than Rob's setup is now!...

Salutations,

Michel Samson
a/s Bicephale


... Rob's SBBS/Kermit: spend spare-time just to prove he got it trashed
___ MultiMail/MS-DOS v0.45 - Make your TelNet BBS OLMR door *UNIVERSAL*!
--- Maximus/2 3.01
* Origin: COMM Port OS/2 juge.com 204.89.247.1 (281) 980-9671 (1:106/2000)

Hi again Stephen, [This post of November 9 didn't fully propagate]

About "SBBS/W32 Kermit SABOTAGE" of November 8:

Sometimes a SysOp who pretends to correct misinformation happens to
open the door to more misinformation, as for the following text...

Perhaps you missed the generous slathering of sarcasm...

When sarcasm comes from all sides, it can be really hard to tell...

You are offering a GPL incompatible licence to use protocols they
didn't develop or have an IP rights with.

*I* am offering!?... 8-o Never mind, even when that's lawyer talk
and it shuts down some of my cognitive functions, euh... i still manage
to get the point so, i didn't imply that MicroSoft pretends to own copy-
rights over Columbia's `Kermit' at all. Me, offering a ~GPL~ licence?!?

Microsoft IS ON THAT PAGE offering you the right to implement the
Kermit protocol... ...yet another misunderstanding...

Indeed, i think they just advised users to check licensing with the rightful owner which is being Columbia in `Kermit's case, it would seem.

-=*=-

All that is needed is plain and simple instructions... ...I'd be
willing to do it for you. ...neither one of us is interested in
carrying on a running battle on FidoNet... All the SysOp will have
to do is add the protocol driver. Share your knowledge with us.

To provide instructions regarding SysOp BBS SoftWare was never part
of the deal, as far as i'm concerned: each person, SysOp and BBSer, was supposed to contribute with what he knew best... In any case, i'll take
your word for what it is and see how it goes; don't miss the next post.
^
|
[Oups! Rejected on sight again!]

Salutations,

Michel Samson
a/s Bicephale


... Rob's SBBS/Kermit: spend spare-time to discover a form of SABOTAGE!
___ MultiMail/MS-DOS v0.45 - Trying to make TelNet OLMR BBSing UNIVERSAL
--- Maximus/2 3.01
* Origin: COMM Port OS/2 juge.com 204.89.247.1 (281) 980-9671 (1:106/2000)

Re: SBBS/W32 Kermit SABOTAGE
By: Michel Samson to Stephen Hurd on Tue Nov 09 2004 17:10:00

`MSK.INI' was more "Ready-Made" in 2003 than Rob's setup is now!...

Is is it or is it not a ready made kit? I didn't bother reading the .INI file at all since I read this:
"Remember, it's Work on Progress (no "Ready-Made kit" yet)"

I took this to mean that you didn't have a setup which works to your satisfaction. Apparently I was mistaken.

Now... I've perused the comments in the message...
I'm wondering what the function of the "Kermit Text" is supposed to be... could you clarify this a bit for me?

I notice there's no corresponding 7-bit Kermit upload.

Concerning the 7-bit thing... this could be marked "Compatible, Slow kermit" or some such, correct? Essentially, I'm wondering about users staring at the selections not knowing which to use...

[K]ermit (Modern)
Kermit [C]ompatible mode

Could it be reduce to those two? ie: Compatible mode would be 7-bit slow without ReSend functionality... the classic lowest common denominator Kermit whereas "Modern" kermit could be modern kermit with crash recovery, compression, and all the other goodies.

Also, having different options for upload than for download would be potentially confusing for users. What downsides would there be to collapsing it to the same two configurations for uploads and downloads? (Is Kermit Text really 7-bit kermit is disguise?)
--- SBBSecho 2.10-FreeBSD
* Origin: FreeBSD Synchronet - telnet://FreeBSD.synchro.net (1:140/17)

Re: SBBS/W32 Kermit SABOTAGE
By: Michel Samson to Stephen Hurd on Tue Nov 09 2004 17:10:02

To provide instructions regarding SysOp BBS SoftWare was never part
of the deal, as far as i'm concerned: each person, SysOp and BBSer, was supposed to contribute with what he knew best... In any case, i'll take your word for what it is and see how it goes; don't miss the next post.

Not sure what the deal was... but I only know of two people with any real hands-on kermit knoledge... Winston Smith and yourself. My use of kermit has always been limited to the occasional file transfer over particulaily weird links... and I generally use a much slower mode than is really required.

For 8-bit clean links (ie: telnet) I generally do not use Kermit. Not because I have anything against Kermit per se, but because I personally find it faster to use something else.

I do understand that there are at least a couple people who use Kermit on a regular basis. For those people, I'm therefore interested in allowing them to use their protocol of choice. Kermit will never be the first file transfer tool I reach for, but I can readily understand that it may the the first one someone else reaches for. My interest is therefore to provide a useable Kermit file transfer to those people who use Kermit because they want to. Personally, I would believe that these are the people who would have a sane Kermit implementation... not people using HyperTerminal for example which has a terrible Kermit implementation. If I saw someone using Kermit in HyperTerminal, I'd reccomend using a different transfer protocol. If HyperTerminal is their terminal of choice, it would be silly for them to use Kermit no matter how good the real Kermit protocol is. This is the main reason I have a bit of resistance to providing a 7-bit slow kermit as a choice... on a telnet connection (which they have) there is no reason to use a 7-bit paranoid Kermit.

However, I'm even willing to go a step further and provide them with a 7-bit slow kermit if that's what they want... but I don't want to promote the use of 7-bit slow kermit in the face of protocols which are better than 7-bit slow kermit for the purpose of transferring a file from a BBS over a telnet connection. Ideally, I personally feel the best bet would be to have the choices something like this:

Kermit [7]-bit (Compatible) - SLOW
XModem - SLOW
XModem/1K - Sluggish
YModem - SLOW
YModem/1K - Sluggish
YModem/G - Good
ZModem - Fast
Kermit (Modern) - Fast

So the new user has a resonable chance of picking the appropriate protocol.
--- SBBSecho 2.10-FreeBSD
* Origin: FreeBSD Synchronet - telnet://FreeBSD.synchro.net (1:140/17)

Hi Stephen,

About "SBBS/W32 Kermit SABOTAGE" in two parts of November 9:

...each... ...was supposed to contribute with what he knew best...

Not sure what the deal was...

You should find some clues in the *1* week record i made available:

http://public.sogetel.net/bicephale/Vert-801.QWK.ZIP (284 Kb)

...I only know of two people with any real hands-on kermit...

^^^^^^
I wrote it before: i'll discuss the `Kermit' protocol, preferably.

My use of kermit... ...faster to use something else.

Believe me, _your_ use of `Kermit' isn't involved! I just react to
a situation where SysOps (like Gregg Somes, for example) can't manage to install Rob's .INI without getting `Kermit' aborts ("UnKnown FileSize");
one may also conclude you experienced no proper `Kermit' setup just yet.

...provide a useable Kermit file transfer to those people who use
Kermit because they want to. Personally, I would believe that these
are the people who would have a sane Kermit... not people using HyperTerminal for example which has a terrible Kermit...

When Swindell wrote about `HyperTerminal' he didn't care to mention *NUMBERS*; the chances are he was getting below 600 cps even in a local ~TelNet~ session because he didn't say otherwise when it was on topic...

But reality is even more complex! We're aware that practically all `Kermit' transfers in `HyperTerminal' are bound to crawl but i also made comments about a very controversial information here: when i tested the `C-Kermit 5A(189)'/`HyperTerminal' duo side-by-side via `VSPD XP v4', it revealed excessive errors and a failure to terminate on completion but i observed transfer rates which went FAR BEYOND MY EXPECTATIONS (3K5 cps), nonetheless! I didn't have much time to invest for discovering a "magic
spell" which brings it back to life, euh... so, `HyperTerminal' remains
unfit for `Kermit' sessions until further notice but it doesn't mean the
issue can't be solved just because i have my own limits as a human. ;^>

If HyperTerminal is their terminal of choice, it would be silly...

Boths sides must be suitable, `MS-Kermit' for a `WilCat!' or `BBBS' session is DECEIVING and the reverse is also true because i never got it
right when `HyperTerminal' connected to suitable remote systems, so far.

...I have a bit of resistance to providing a 7-bit slow kermit...

It differenciates us: i don't. My system may be the bottleneck so
i won't say `Kermit' can reach beyond 25K7 cps but even if using Control Character Escaping costs a lot in terms of overhead, it seems probable a `Kermit' transfer will be better than an hesitating `ZMoDem' transfer or
none at all. I regret no sturdy `Kermit' has been put to test just yet!

...there is no reason to use a 7-bit paranoid Kermit.

There's even less to care about anthropomorphism over a protocol...

...I personally feel the best bet would be to have the choices
something like this: ...Compatible... ... ...Modern... So the
new user has a resonable chance of picking the appropriate protocol.

Liberty of choice is a topic which does get my attention, under the circumstances... I've done more than my share in order to dissociate my
name from Swindell's `Kermit' setup by making `MSK.INI' self-documentary
and by addressing the problem of SysOps failing to get his configuration
to work. The guys who would disagree to offer the whole set of `Kermit' features as found in the `MSK' setup are left the CHOICE to only support
the BASIC configuration, i'm not liable for Rob's decision to render his `Kermit' support restrictive and the responsability isn't mine since the additional `Kermit' features are OPTIONAL BUT YET PROVIDED in `MSK.INI'.

Anyway, i expect no change with `SBBS' anytime soon and i believe a sequence such as the one you suggested wouldn't reflect reality neither.

`MSK.INI' was more "Ready-Made" in 2003 than Rob's setup is now!...

I didn't bother reading the .INI file at all...

I noticed. I confess my creterias of quality differ: Rob pretends
he can find the FINAL answer while having lapses of inspiration on a hot
summer day, not me... Don't bother, i'll know it if more people fail at
the task after another fifteen months but feel free to refer them to me!

...I'm wondering about users... Could it be reduced...

Stop wondering, Winston and i are the only `Kermit' users you heard
of, right?... Don't expect me to add an ~APC~ remote configuration or a
"8.3" to ~LFN~ FileName reconversion mechanism in a breeze, i'm sorry if assymetry fails to meet esthetical standards but those comments below my "Suggested Presentation" also display when `UlProt.ASC'/`DlProt.ASC' are
used and i cared to COLOUR-diffentiate too! See `Kermit' documentation.

It's mission accomplished for me so i'll be leaving Borg space soon
since there's no opportunity to discuss issues related to `Protocol.LOG'
or else and you've required too much of my patience, if you ask me! The http://public.sogetel.net/bicephale/MSK.INI setup will remain available,
refer to it any `SBBS' SysOp (or BBSer) who requires help - if you mind.

Salutations,

Michel Samson
a/s Bicephale


... Rob's SBBS/Kermit: spend spare-time just to prove he got it trashed
___ MultiMail/XT v0.45 - If only TelNet OLMR BBSing could be *UNIVERSAL*
--- Maximus/2 3.01
* Origin: COMM Port OS/2 juge.com 204.89.247.1 (281) 980-9671 (1:106/2000)

Re: SBBS/W32 Kermit SABOTAGE
By: Michel Samson to Stephen Hurd on Wed Nov 10 2004 08:54:00

...I'm wondering about users... Could it be reduced...

Stop wondering, Winston and i are the only `Kermit' users you heard
of, right?... Don't expect me to add an ~APC~ remote configuration or a "8.3" to ~LFN~ FileName reconversion mechanism in a breeze, i'm sorry if assymetry fails to meet esthetical standards but those comments below my "Suggested Presentation" also display when `UlProt.ASC'/`DlProt.ASC' are used and i cared to COLOUR-diffentiate too! See `Kermit' documentation.

It's mission accomplished for me so i'll be leaving Borg space soon since there's no opportunity to discuss issues related to `Protocol.LOG'
or else and you've required too much of my patience, if you ask me! The http://public.sogetel.net/bicephale/MSK.INI setup will remain available, refer to it any `SBBS' SysOp (or BBSer) who requires help - if you mind.

Sorry, I still don't understand what the "Kermit Text" one is. Could you give me more details on that?

Ok, done. I added a link to the kermit docs as shipped with Synchronet.
--- SBBSecho 2.10-FreeBSD
* Origin: FreeBSD Synchronet - telnet://FreeBSD.synchro.net (1:140/17)

Hi Sean,

We're NOT going to spend days plugging away at it.

If you're interested...

Some people appear to find a lot more motivation in diminishing the
work of others than in testing it. Take Rob Swindell, and more recently Stephen Hurd, for example... they've kept insulting me thru their ~WEB~
site over a setup they can't tell much about but yet they displayed lots
of efforts when it was time to object systematically for weeks. To hope
that individuals with such a biased background can be interrested hardly
sounds realistic - check this here: http://synchro.net/docs/kermit.txt!

In reality, `MSK.INI' is made "self-documentary" enough to garantee success and macros ease a SysOp's task well beyond my obstructor's field
of expertise but nothing objective is interresting enough for SysOps who
are conditioned by larger-than-life EGOs... Nice to see you try though:
it's not often that i can read posts which don't follow the main stream.

...a setup I have that works with Maximus for Synchronet...
Kermit.Exe -p%p -b%W -t%k -m%d -f%D -r%t ...that's verbatim...
If you want the actual KERMIT.EXE, let me know and I'll send it...

I have no idea how `Opus Kermit v1.05' is behaving on `BSD~ systems
but don't forget that Vince Perriello built it from `C-Kermit' code that
dates back to 1985-1986. `OKermit' was released before 1988 arrived!...

Salutations,

Michel Samson
a/s Bicephale
http://public.sogetel.net/bicephale/


... As LEGACY as it may sound `MS-Kermit' flew to the Space Station! :)
--- MultiMail/MS-DOS v0.45 - Numbers make BBSing *UNIVERSAL*, not sugar.
* Origin: BBS Networks @ www.bbsnets.com 808-839-6036 (1:10/345)

own draft, nonetheless... I also informed him that hanged sessions fail MS>to be detected (the "CARRIER" signal may be stuck), that message-pointer MS>UpDating may be wrong and/or that users are at risk to be kept out of an MS>`SBBS' system for a day. This matter of a weak external protocol-driver MS>interface only makes things worst as he won't even try to address it but MS>`Kermit' was made crippled because of "fluff" he has rejected, actually.

If goofing up the setup could result in these things, they sound like good reasons not to risk setting up Kermit at all.

Mike
---
* SLMR 2.1a * Does anybody here remember Vera Lynn?


--- GTMail 1.26
* Origin: Kentucky's Capitol City Online * 502/875-8938 (1:2320/105.0)

Re: SBBS/W32 Kermit SABOTAGE
By: MICHEL SAMSON to SEAN DENNIS on Mon Nov 15 2004 15:42:00

Some people appear to find a lot more motivation in diminishing the work of others than in testing it. Take Rob Swindell, and more recently Stephen Hurd, for example... they've kept insulting me thru their ~WEB~

I made the change after you added something rather similar to your MSK.INI (Which is referenced from that document... I notice that document isn't referenced from MSK.INI) All I added was a direct quote, but I'm perfectly willing to remove both DMs editorial and reduce my quote to just the URL should you remove the editorial content from your MSK.INI.
--- SBBSecho 2.10-FreeBSD
* Origin: FreeBSD Synchronet - telnet://FreeBSD.synchro.net (1:140/17)

Hi Stephen,

About "SBBS/W32 Kermit SABOTAGE" of November 10 and 15:

...I'm wondering...

Stop wondering... http://public.sogetel.net/bicephale/MSK.INI
refer to it any `SBBS' SysOp (or BBSer) who requires help...

...I added a link to the kermit docs as shipped with Synchronet.

This economy of words tells a lot about your so called "honesty"...

%-7

Some people appear to find a lot more motivation in diminishing the
work of others than in testing it. Take Rob Swindell, and more
recently Stephen Hurd, for example... they've kept insulting me...

I made the change after you added something rather similar to your MSK.INI... All I added was a direct quote...

Remember `Kermit.INI v1.5' of October 17?... It's still unchanged: http://cvs.synchro.net/cgi-bin/viewcvs.cgi/docs/kermit.txt?rev=1.5 - and
i only used Rob's own medecine much later, in a post of November 9 where `MSK.INI' was published *SIMULTANEOUSLY* on `FidoNet' and my ~WEB~ site:

http://fidonet.sensationcontent.com/echomail/bbs_internet/ded9b1f8275a82ad.html

One of the many times when i required that my name is removed was a
post of October 16 where http://public.sogetel.net/bicephale/MSK.INI was
still exempt of extraneous comments (i didn't even sign) and Rob's reply
was what i refer to above: totally uncalled-for and world-wide insults.

8-7

...I'm perfectly willing to remove both DMs editorial and reduce my
quote to just the URL should you remove the editorial content...

As you'll notice, it doesn't take as much time for an ordinary user
to bring such simple modifications to documents as it takes for a SysOp:
let me see... starting from October 17, i find 30 days and counting!...

The same goes about acting on reports from the BBSers or SysOps who encountered problems with the "default" `Kermit' setup - it doesn't take fifteen months just to change a few lines in a badly documented file!...

Salutations,

Michel Samson
a/s Bicephale


... Rob's SBBS/W32 Kermit: develop *SABOTAGE* skills in your spare time
--- MultiMail/MS-DOS v0.45 - Why isn't TelNet OLMR BBSing UNIVERSAL yet?
* Origin: BBS Networks @ www.bbsnets.com 808-839-6036 (1:10/345)

Hi Mike,

About "SBBS/W32 Kermit SABOTAGE" of November 15:

...you and your guru remain consistently silent relatively to the
VERY WEAK INTERFACE between `SynchroNet' and `MS-Kermit'...

...breaking "kermit" because the interface is somehow "weak". [?]

MS} Wrong, he's been warned of the consequences of rejecting my .INI on
MS} 1st sight and hence his decision made him responsible for disabling
MS} some of the `Kermit' features - SysOps & BBSers *DID* complain...

I also informed him that hanged sessions fail to be detected (the
"CARRIER" signal may be stuck), that message-pointer UpDating may be
wrong and/or that users are at risk to be kept out of an `SBBS'
system for a day. This matter of a weak external protocol-driver
interface only makes things worst as he won't even try to address it
but `Kermit' was made crippled because of "fluff" he has rejected...

If goofing up the setup could result in these things, they sound
like good reasons not to risk setting up Kermit at all.

That's why i refer to Rob Swindell's `Kermit.INI' as SABOTAGE! The `MS-Kermit.EXE' external file-transfer protocol-driver isn't involved, a
"NO CARRIER" condition would make it react (*IF* only one occured) and i
also tried to manage with Error Trapping relative to it but Rob rejected
my contribution... It's his task to ensure that his SoftWare remains in control, `SBBS' is responsible for supporting the ~FOSSIL~ interface and
it runs the drivers, not the opposite, after all! I'd most probably get
the same results reproduced using ANY OTHER EXTERNAL PROTOCOL-DRIVER, do
you see the larger picture now? This `SBBS' issue is out of my hands...

Salutations,

Michel Samson
a/s Bicephale


... Rob's SBBS/Kermit: spend spare-time just to find out why it stalls!
--- MultiMail/MS-DOS v0.45 - Trying to make TelNet OLMR BBSing UNIVERSAL
* Origin: BBS Networks @ www.bbsnets.com 808-839-6036 (1:10/345)

Hello, MICHEL.

On 15 Nov 04 at 15:42, MICHEL SAMSON wrote to SEAN DENNIS:

I have no idea how `Opus Kermit v1.05' is behaving on `BSD~
systems but don't forget that Vince Perriello built it from `C-Kermit' code that dates back to 1985-1986. `OKermit' was released before 1988 arrived!...

I bet it still works. :) I'll find out soon enough.

Later,
Sean

// hausmaus@darktech.org | http://midnightshour.org | AIM: eekahausmaus
--- GoldED+/W32 1.1.5-21011
* Origin: Stranded at the Outpost... (1:18/200)

Re: SBBS/W32 Kermit SABOTAGE
By: MICHEL SAMSON to STEPHEN HURD on Tue Nov 16 2004 08:48:00

Remember `Kermit.INI v1.5' of October 17?... It's still unchanged: http://cvs.synchro.net/cgi-bin/viewcvs.cgi/docs/kermit.txt?rev=1.5 - and
i only used Rob's own medecine much later, in a post of November 9 where `MSK.INI' was published *SIMULTANEOUSLY* on `FidoNet' and my ~WEB~ site:

That will be there forever. It's CVS. The current revision is 1.7

See http://cvs.synchro.net/cgi-bin/viewcvs.cgi/docs/kermit.txt for a change log.

You'll notice that I didn't change it until November 10th... which is after you added editorial content to MSK.INI.

Are we done with this now?
--- SBBSecho 2.10-FreeBSD
* Origin: FreeBSD Synchronet - telnet://FreeBSD.synchro.net (1:140/17)

Re: SBBS/W32 Kermit SABOTAGE
By: MICHEL SAMSON to MIKE POWELL on Tue Nov 16 2004 08:48:00

That's why i refer to Rob Swindell's `Kermit.INI' as SABOTAGE! The `MS-Kermit.EXE' external file-transfer protocol-driver isn't involved, a
"NO CARRIER" condition would make it react (*IF* only one occured) and i also tried to manage with Error Trapping relative to it but Rob rejected
my contribution... It's his task to ensure that his SoftWare remains in control, `SBBS' is responsible for supporting the ~FOSSIL~ interface and
it runs the drivers, not the opposite, after all! I'd most probably get
the same results reproduced using ANY OTHER EXTERNAL PROTOCOL-DRIVER, do
you see the larger picture now? This `SBBS' issue is out of my hands...

I can't seem to make sense out of this statement... here's what I get out of this...

1) MS-Kermit.EXE has nothing to do with a problem.
2) If the user disconnects while transferring, MS-Kermit.EXE "reacts" badly (while not being involved apparently)
3) SBBS must retain control of the socket, and is responsoble for the FOSSIL interface to same (This is correct)
4) These same unspecified results (More on this later) would probobly happen with other protocol drivers (they don't)

Now, these unspecified results are a "carrier hang". Sockets have no concept of a carrier... the socket is open until both sides close it (Honest, that's how TCP works) you cannot do a direct FOSSIL <-> TCP interface. If the problem is in fact a carrier hang, the problem is with the FOSSIL driver not the kermit setup.

Now, given that a largeish number of Synchronet BBSs run a largeish number of FOSSIL doors regularily, one would be inclined to believe it works pretty well. --- SBBSecho 2.10-FreeBSD
* Origin: FreeBSD Synchronet - telnet://FreeBSD.synchro.net (1:140/17)

Hi Sean,

About "SBBS/W32 Kermit SABOTAGE" of November 16:

We're NOT going to spend days plugging away at it.

If you're interested... ...works with Maximus for Synchronet...
Kermit.Exe -p%p -b%W -t%k -m%d -f%D -r%t If you want the actual KERMIT.EXE, let me know and I'll send it...

To hope that individuals with such a biased background can be
interrested hardly sounds realistic... ...nothing objective is interresting enough... Nice to see you try though: it's not often
that i can read posts which don't follow the main stream. ...don't forget... `OKermit' was released before 1988 arrived!...

I bet it still works. I'll find out soon enough.

I wouldn't know about `BSD' tests and i'd need `TurboCOM/VIP' for a
`W32' workbench (it's a Virtual ~UART~ emulator), so... Keep us posted!

Salutations, :)

Michel Samson
a/s Bicephale
http://public.sogetel.net/bicephale/


... SysOp tip: Kermit is mature, so is my great grandfather (2004-10-3)
--- MultiMail/MS-DOS v0.45 - Who would try UNIVERSAL TelNet OLMR BBSing?
* Origin: BBS Networks @ www.bbsnets.com 808-839-6036 (1:10/345)

Hi Stephen,

About "SBBS/W32 Kermit SABOTAGE" of November 16:

...I'm wondering...

Stop wondering... http://public.sogetel.net/bicephale/MSK.INI

...I added a link to the kermit docs as shipped with Synchronet.

This economy of words tells a lot about your so called "honesty"... Remember `Kermit.INI v1.5' of October 17?... ...still unchanged...

That will be there forever. It's CVS. Are we done with this now?

How convenient... I'm supposed to believe you have no control over
the content of your Hard-Disks and there's no way to erase any *TRASH*?!

%-o

...breaking "kermit" because the interface is somehow "weak". [?]

MS} Wrong... ...his decision made him responsible for disabling some of
MS} the `Kermit' features... I also informed him that hanged sessions
MS} fail to be detected... ...message-pointer UpDating may be wrong...
MS} ...users are at risk to be kept out of an `SBBS' system for a day.

This matter of a weak external protocol-driver interface only makes
things worst as he won't even try to address it but `Kermit' was
made crippled because of "fluff" he has rejected...

If goofing up the setup could result in these things, they sound
like good reasons not to risk setting up Kermit at all.

MS} That's why i refer to Rob Swindell's `Kermit.INI' as SABOTAGE!

The `MS-Kermit.EXE' external file-transfer protocol-driver isn't involved... This `SBBS' issue is out of my hands...

I can't seem to make sense out of this statement...

It's no surprize, one must be somewhat biased to distort statements
like you did but i may have detected a sign of hope later in your reply.

SBBS must retain control of the socket... Sockets have no concept
of a carrier... ...Honest, that's how TCP works...

A "Socket"!? What "Socket"? There's just no "Socket" when drivers
are considered from a ~FOSSIL~ environment perspective!... Guess again.

If the problem is in fact a carrier hang, the problem is with the
FOSSIL driver not the kermit setup.

I can agree on something, at last! `MS-Kermit.EXE' isn't involved,
just lets not take for granted ~FOSSIL~ layer problems alone can explain
why the "CARRIER" signal hangs, though. You appear to get the point: i
simply stated that the hanged "CARRIER" problem occurs at Rob's SoftWare level... In other words, the external protocol drivers (`MS-Kermit.EXE' included) only react to the (simulated) "CARRIER" condition accordingly.

If you take a look at `Kermit.INI v1.3' of October 12 you'll find a real-life application illustrating what i refer to: "Set Port Fossil 1" combined to "Set Carrier On", so far so good! It happens that `MSK.INI'
of November 16 also has the very same settings, but with a nuance in the implementation sequence and the comments... Rob doesn't set the port to ~FOSSIL~ early, i do; we both "Set Carrier On", nonetheless. Rob has a side-line note saying "Recover from HangUps IMMEDIATELY" but notice that there's a significant difference in my comment as mine says "Immediately recover from hangups if well supported in the BBS program", to be exact.
^^
SD) These same unspecified results...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Hummm... As if i never wrote a word! Well, i notice you discarded
the part which i re-inserted in a quote above (lines eighteen to twenty-
one, inclusively)!!! Some special people who can't stop themselves from banging on the walls will appreciate the following distraction, i guess.

;->

Rob's comment is "misleading" at best if one reads in `Kermit.INI':
"Set Flow None", followed by "No flow control (this is handled by TCP)"!
^^^
8^o

As far as external file-transfer protocol-drivers are concerned, it
has nothing to do with Flow-Control done at other levels: if a SysOp is
using `COM/IP' and it's set for ~RTS~/~CTS~ Flow-Control then the advice
i'd find appropriate would be to revise the .INI and set it accordingly.

This is why `MSK.INI' says "Seems OKay for this particular use": i
never got an opportunity to put `MSK.INI' to test when i submitted it to
the attention of Rob Swindell on July, 2003, to say the least - he seems
to think he's omnipotent enough to decide what qualifies as "Ready-Made"
before tests are over but i don't (i'm only an ordinary user after all)!

The comment in Rob's `Kermit.INI' is valid only when `MS-Kermit' is communicating with a DOS InterNet interface, like `Waterloo-TCP' packet- drivers, a Novell ~ODI~ setup, etc., and which would mean using INTERNAL ~TelNet~ support. There's no reference to speed or, euh... ~TCP~/~IP~,
euh... because the port is set to ~FOSSIL~. Isn't that simple enough?!

Now, back to "unspecified" stuff, after this educative interlude...

%-b,

More on this later... ...given that a largeish number of Synchronet
BBSs run a largeish number of FOSSIL doors regularily...

Oups, your time is over!... You've got fifteen months to check it.

Salutations,

Michel Samson
a/s Bicephale


... Rob's SBBS/Kermit: spend spare-time just to probe weak interfacing!
--- MultiMail/MS-DOS v0.45 - Who votes for UNIVERSAL TelNet OLMR BBSing?
* Origin: BBS Networks @ www.bbsnets.com 808-839-6036 (1:10/345)

Re: SBBS/W32 Kermit SABOTAGE
By: MICHEL SAMSON to STEPHEN HURD on Wed Nov 17 2004 12:32:00

That will be there forever. It's CVS. Are we done with this now?

How convenient... I'm supposed to believe you have no control over
the content of your Hard-Disks and there's no way to erase any *TRASH*?!

You know nothing of CVS or RCS apparently.
--- SBBSecho 2.10-FreeBSD
* Origin: FreeBSD Synchronet - telnet://FreeBSD.synchro.net (1:140/17)

Hi Stephen,

About "SBBS/W32 Kermit SABOTAGE" of November 17:

...I added a link to the kermit docs as shipped with Synchronet.

This economy of words tells a lot about your so called "honesty"... Remember `Kermit.INI v1.5' of October 17?... ...still unchanged...

That will be there forever. It's CVS.

How convenient... I'm supposed to believe you have no control...

You know nothing of CVS or RCS apparently.

Vas donc chier ostie de niaiseux. Tu peux ben te la s'couer un bon
coup si tu te sens fier de sortir une lesson ~TCP~/~IP~ hors-contexte de
ton chapeau lorsqu'il est devenu clair que t'avais le ciboulot ailleurs!

Salutations,

Michel Samson
a/s Bicephale


... Rob's SBBS/Kermit: spend spare-time to learn how things are trashed
___ MultiMail/XT v0.45 - If only TelNet OLMR BBSing could be *UNIVERSAL*
--- Maximus/2 3.01
* Origin: COMM Port OS/2 juge.com 204.89.247.1 (281) 980-9671 (1:106/2000)

Re: SBBS/W32 Kermit SABOTAGE
By: Michel Samson to Stephen Hurd on Wed Nov 17 2004 16:59:00

That will be there forever. It's CVS.

How convenient... I'm supposed to believe you have no control...

You know nothing of CVS or RCS apparently.

Vas donc chier ostie de niaiseux. Tu peux ben te la s'couer un bon coup si tu te sens fier de sortir une lesson ~TCP~/~IP~ hors-contexte de
ton chapeau lorsqu'il est devenu clair que t'avais le ciboulot ailleurs!

The Synchronet FOSSIL driver is a thin compatability layer for TCP/IP... Synchronet does not do FOSSIL, it emulates it so FOSSIL programs can run over TCP/IP. It's relevent.

As for RCS... it's effectively impossible to manually edit an RCS file. If you knew anything about RCS (Which CVS uses for local files) you'd know that.
--- SBBSecho 2.10-FreeBSD
* Origin: FreeBSD Synchronet - telnet://FreeBSD.synchro.net (1:140/17)

Hello, Stephen.

On 17 Nov 04 at 16:26, Stephen Hurd wrote to Michel Samson:

As for RCS... it's effectively impossible to manually edit an RCS
file. If you knew anything about RCS (Which CVS uses for local files) you'd know that.

You speak French? :)

Later,
Sean

// hausmaus@darktech.org | http://midnightshour.org | AIM: eekahausmaus
--- GoldED+/W32 1.1.5-21011
* Origin: Stranded at the Outpost... (1:18/200)

Hello, Michel.

On 17 Nov 04 at 16:59, Michel Samson wrote to Stephen Hurd:

Vas donc chier ostie de niaiseux. Tu peux ben te la s'couer un
bon coup si tu te sens fier de sortir une lesson ~TCP~/~IP~
hors-contexte de ton chapeau lorsqu'il est devenu clair que t'avais le ciboulot ailleurs!

Je ne comprends pas un mot simple de ce que vous avez juste dit. Peut-être si j'apprenais jamais le français, il serait facile pour moi de lire!

Non, je ne parle pas français. J'avais l'habitude Babelfish pour traduire pour moi. <G>

Later,
Sean

// hausmaus@darktech.org | http://midnightshour.org | AIM: eekahausmaus
--- GoldED+/W32 1.1.5-21011
* Origin: Stranded at the Outpost... (1:18/200)

Re: SBBS/W32 Kermit SABOTAGE
By: Sean Dennis to Stephen Hurd on Thu Nov 18 2004 22:27:19

You speak French? :)

Not anymore, but I can still read it to a degree.
--- SBBSecho 2.10-FreeBSD
* Origin: FreeBSD Synchronet - telnet://FreeBSD.synchro.net (1:140/17)

Hello, Stephen.

On 18 Nov 04 at 22:37, Stephen Hurd wrote to Sean Dennis:

Not anymore, but I can still read it to a degree.

I've never tried... my wife tried to learn it, but it didn't stick... she does speak German really well... me, I know a little Spanish and a lot of Pascal.


Later,
Sean

// hausmaus@darktech.org | http://midnightshour.org | AIM: eekahausmaus
--- GoldED+/W32 1.1.5-21011
* Origin: Stranded at the Outpost... (1:18/200)

Hi Sean,

About "SBBS/W32 Kermit SABOTAGE" of November 18:

...I added a link to the kermit docs as shipped with Synchronet.

This economy of words tells a lot about your so called "honesty"...

That will be there forever. It's CVS.

How convenient... I'm supposed to believe you have no control...

You know nothing of CVS or RCS apparently.

Vas donc chier ostie de niaiseux. Tu peux ben te la s'couer...

Je ne comprends pas un simple mot... Peut-être si j'apprenais...

Don't bother... ;-) Just imagine my reaction when, after a months
long thread, systematic obstruction finally leads to a decision which we
could have agreed on from the begining, without controversy! Little can
stop some individuals from displaying their omnipotence, apparently; if
one goes back to my post of November 9 and 10 over closed-circuit tests, though, one will find puzzling that those people didn't pay attention to
a *SIGNIFICANT* improvement observed when using `HyperTerminal' with the `CKOKer16.EXE' protocol-driver run under some `W32' DOS box environment:

Every other protocol implemented in Hyterminal works better...

MS} That may be true now but i observed a strange improvement...

...HyperTerminal... ...has a terrible Kermit...

When Swindell wrote about `HyperTerminal' he didn't care to mention *NUMBERS*; the chances are he was getting below 600 cps... ...i
tested the `C-Kermit 5A(189)'/`HyperTerminal' duo side-by-side via
`VSPD XP v4'... ...i observed transfer rates which went FAR BEYOND
MY EXPECTATIONS (3K5 cps), nonetheless! ...`HyperTerminal' remains

MS} unfit for `Kermit' sessions until further notice but it doesn't mean
MS} the issue can't be solved just because i have my own limits...

I have preliminary results at these two ~URL~s for everyone to see:

http://public.sogetel.net/bicephale/HTKermit.JPG (129 Kb)
http://public.sogetel.net/bicephale/HTKer(2).JPG (148 Kb)

It seems probable that using a P-200 Mhz MMX PC to simulate Virtual Serial-Ports, using a set of ~TelNet~ client/server SoftWare in between, eventually, euh... well, that must be the BARE MINIMUM WorkBench to get testing done but no omnipotent SysOp could notice the numbers, anyway...

8^>

...si tu te sens fier de sortir une lesson ~TCP~/~IP~ hors-contexte
de ton chapeau...

It's relevent.

D'habitude j'avais Babelfish pour traduire...

It's a Babel Tower when an omnipotent SysOp pretends to correct any "misleading" statement and just adds more of his own with topic steering
over ~TCP~/~IP~ issues which got no ties with ~FOSSIL~ interfacing as is
done in `Kermit.INI', a ~FOSSIL~ protocol-driver setup! %-o I've dealt
with Kermit', learned specific `SBBS' concepts, `MSK.INI' still won't be
used and now topic steering is natural... I say don't spoil your spare-
time for a guy who needs no attention: he's omnipotent, after all! %-b

You speak French?

Not anymore, but I can still read it to a degree.

I knew it: this one turns out to be omnipotent all right!!! Well,
if you must, ask for a translation but i warn that it would be much more improper than a relax discussion over, say, `Turbo Pascal' code!... P->

Salutations,

Michel Samson
a/s Bicephale
http://public.sogetel.net/bicephale/


... Rob's SBBS/Kermit: spend spare-time to learn things he didn't know!
___ MultiMail/MS-DOS v0.45 - Who will make TelNet OLMR BBSing UNIVERSAL?
--- Maximus/2 3.01
* Origin: COMM Port OS/2 juge.com 204.89.247.1 (281) 980-9671 (1:106/2000)

Hi Nancy,

About "SBBS/W32 Kermit SABOTAGE" of November 22:

Support for a platform has to come from users of that platform.

...the `MS-Kermit' terminal is OK on `SBBS'... Was this a topic-

MS} steering attempt?... ...Wayne Warthen's `Kermit for `Win-16/32'
MS} (which is FreeWare) just hangs the session and reveals how *WEAK*
MS} `SBBS's *INTERFACE* to external (`Kermit') protocol drivers can be!

I have no data on Wayne Warthen's implementation.

...it can fly at over 25K7 cps... It's a mid-nineties 3rd-party
version where the `Kermit' packet-size is a thousand bytes...

...provide simple instructions... All the SysOp will have to do is
add the protocol driver. We are not knowingly sabotaging kermit.

`MSK.INI' was more "Ready-Made" in 2003 than Rob's setup is now!...
Cut here --> -------[ http://public.sogetel.net/bicephale/MSK.INI ]-

Not sure what the deal was...

...clues... http://public.sogetel.net/bicephale/Vert-801.QWK.ZIP

...there is no reason to use a 7-bit paranoid Kermit.

...SysOps (like Gregg...) can't manage... ...even if using Control Character Escaping costs a lot in terms of overhead... ...transfer

MS} will be better than an hesitating `ZMoDem'... ...i'm not liable
MS} for Rob's decision to render his `Kermit' support restrictive...

...the only* protocol that I could use with Telnet uploads was
kermit (the slow original), as Zmodem only worked for downloads...

I can see three main episodes in `Kermit's evolution: the pre-1985
period in which `BBBS-Kermit' and `WC-Kermit' belong (these relics serve anti-`Kermit' campaigns better if you ask me), the 1985-1995 period (the FreeWare from Wayne Warthen belongs there) and then the post-1995 period
(where `Kermit' became a viable alternative to `ZMoDem' via ~TelNet~ for
*ALL* ~FOSSIL~-based BBS systems - and a few more, if an ~UART~ emulator
such as `SIO'/`VMoDem' happened to be available). The `MSK.INI' feature Stephen refered to was intended to DownGrade `MS-Kermit' just enough for `WWKfW-16/32' to be supported, pre-1985 `Kermit' is out of this picture.

I was very thankful to find

NB} that ["that"=`MSK.INI' Nov. 9 "Kermit [7]-Bits Binary" item!?]

7-bit paranoid Kermit available...

It's easy to get BBSers mixed up about the protocol so i must clear
this up. The `Kermit' "7-Bits Binary" macro i refer to in `MSK.INI' and `UlProt.ASC' is a completely separate topic and it's not on my wish-list
(not even Stephen's, i guess) to cripple `MS-Kermit' so much it would be equivalent to a 3rd-party archaic implementation... I do understand why
you appreciated having `WC-Kermit' when you needed it, nonetheless! ;-)
^^^^^^^^^
My `MSK.INI' setup refers to a 7-Bits `MS-Kermit' option but that's
not definitive: Rob Swindell pretends to produce setups from the top of
his head which he declares to be "Ready-Made" before the testing is over
but i don't; more clearly, i could have called it "Fool-Proof" `Kermit'
or whatever but the point is i made this label reflect the feature TO BE EVALUATED and, since it's Work-on-Progress, this is where i'm stuck now.

I'll focus on choosing a proper label once i've determined what set
of `MS-Kermit' parameters allow participating `SBBS/W32' SysOps to offer `WWKfW-16/32' support; considering that it took fifteen months to agree
on publishing one single ~URL~, it won't be soon but they're free to use
only *BASIC* `MSK.INI' macros and to wait for others to finalize it all.

...I can now use Zmodem for my telnet uploads as well...

Not everyone could resist the temptation to just run `{Commo}' over `RLFossil' (which i've done on a regular basis for years), determination
is something i respect but the passage of time makes most frustrations a
bit irrelevant in the end... At that rate, `Windows' might no longer be
a "popular alternative" when the time has come for you to migrate, hence `WWKfW-16/32' won't help neither, i bet! ;-> A Transgenic human of the
future probably won't require external devices to BBS but, until then, a `Win-16/32' user who isn't satisfied with `ZMoDem' over ~TelNet~ has too
few FreeWares to toy with and no `SBBS' .INI supports `WWKfW-16/32' yet.

As i wrote before, DOS ~TelNet~ `ZMoDem' or `Kermit' work for me so `RLFossil'/`{Commo}' or sound `Kermit' setups are what i got to share in
order to promote BBSing, others may have unresolved issues of their own.

Choices are good.

They certainly are! :) The matter is often to get them supported, though; it doesn't help much when Stephen brings ~FTP~/~HTTP~ solutions
on topic and he doesn't point at any DOS-compatible servers, actually...

Salutations, ;->

Michel Samson
a/s Bicephale
http://public.sogetel.net/bicephale/


... Rob's SBBS/Kermit: use spare-time to try a subtle type of SABOTAGE!
--- MultiMail/MS-DOS v0.45 - Help TelNet OLMR BBSing to become UNIVERSAL
* Origin: BBS Networks @ www.bbsnets.com 808-839-6036 (1:10/345)