• IRex/TransX, ~IKDS~...

    From MICHEL SAMSON@1:10/345 to MANLEY HUBBELL on Sun Sep 1 01:44:00 2002
    Hi Manley,

    About "IRex/TransX" of August 30:

    ...if only the `Kermit' file transfer protocol were more popular...
    ...mostly, i use Zmodem to transfer files... I guess its because
    its semi-automatic and begin's to download at the...

    Too bad you had to cut the SysOp-related part, Warren Hrach was one
    of the people i wrote about and he just made that situation clearer. He
    is one SysOp who pretended to have expertise about `Kermit' but it turns
    out that the `BBBS' SoftWare he uses is the worst i've ever seen because
    the maximum `Kermit' packet-size defaults to 16 bytes while the pre-1985 standard is set to 90 bytes or so and it was made 9024 bytes in 1993, if
    i'm not mistaking... After 7 years, since the 1st ~FOSSIL~ version, the picture only became clearer: few SysOps will advertise that `MS-Kermit'
    does Auto-D/L, batch-mode, transfer recovery (plus 7-Bit paths support)!

    So, now that you have a sample of what i meant by "blasphemy"... i
    guess it's more understandable why few BBSers could ever compare it with `ZMoDem' over ~TelNet~ since BBSes began to drift towards the INet? Oh,
    and even after i explained Warren why the `Kermit' support in `BBBS' was
    unfit for ~TelNet~ use (twice, last year and this summer), euh... there
    just seems to be no hope: the `Kermit'-bashing won't stop anytime soon!
    Sysops and users all together will continue to argue that they tried the `Kermit' protocol long ago when they never experienced suitable `Kermit' setups, actually... I won't loose time over things as ego, the point is
    even the latest `Hyper Terminal PE' release (even that!) isn't likely to
    be fit for `Kermit'/~TelNet~ use!!! `ZMoDem' has been imposed to BBSers because of pre-conceptions: a handfull of BBS authors tried their best,
    yet `ZMoDem' still fails on occasions today. In comparison, `MS-Kermit'
    can be made to work reliably but see how a guy offering help is treated!


    ...I guessed it was tcp? ...transmission control protocol...

    ~TelNet~ encapsulation is as far as i can stretch your topic: i'll
    pass my turn if i must comment at the ~TCP~ level... :) All i can tell
    is that i once used `TerMail' over the `RLFossil' ~TelNet~ "shim"; that
    setup involved `ZMoDem' in what looked like ~TelNet~ sessions to me. My transfers often fail under such circumstances, especially when in DOS, a `Kermit' protocol could certainly have improved the situation back then.
    The SysOps insist that all users move to `Windows', etc., when a `PC-XT'
    can still do a lot (if you let it). Yet, SysOps still use external file transfer protocols as `CE-XYZ' (DOS) which is why i'm puzzled to observe
    their ignorance of `Kermit' - even after they were told, and seven years
    having passed in the meantime, `Kermit's potential is ignored, despised!


    Someone who needs to transfer files both ways on INet only needs to
    have a 8088 4.77 Mhz PC with a MoDem, a ~PPP~ INet access and two 5.25"/
    360 Kb diskettes. The SysOps can add `Kermit' over `COM/IP', and BBSers
    can do that too, actually. :> But, that's getting lengthty: my intent
    was to point out how little ressources are truely required; my `Kermit'
    line of topic is secondary: i knew about lack of popularity long ago...


    ...K requires additional instruction to start the process...

    Not for Auto-DownLoad, not since version 3.16 which a BBSer will be
    most likely to use!... Auto-UpLoad is possible too, the SysOps can even reconfigure your `Kermit' protocol remotely, if one decides to let them.

    You simply can't ask for that sort of flexibility with `ZMoDem' and
    the later wasn't very much alive lately, despite misleading appearances!
    In any case, i do have the `Kermit' Auto-DownLoad feature enabled in the `{Commo} v7.7' terminal emulator and many more programs can do the same.

    ...i've seen external Zmodem protocol programs...

    If you're about ~TelNet~ forget it unless you have a ~TelNet~ shim, `COM/IP' does a nice job: `MS-Kermit Lite v3.15' can be a fine external protocol driver and the latest full-version makes a suitable client too.
    Under DOS i only need to load `LSPPP v0.8', `MS-Kermit' interfaces to my
    ~PPP~ packet-driver directly if wanted. For `ZMoDem' transfers, you may
    have to wave `Telix' goodbye; those who can't depend on FreeNets or the
    INet door of a local BBS usually need ~FOSSIL~-aware SoftWare... I know
    of a few DOS program where `ZMoDem' isn't so bad but it's a long road, i
    also noted that you use `Telix' as a DialUp terminal emulator so i'd try
    a `Windows' substitue if i were you. Anyway, if you want to ~TelNet~ to
    public remote systems as sailor.lib.md.us, euh... You may be better off
    with `MS-Kermit v3.16 BETA 10' as Sailor got no `ZMoDem', go figure why. Whatever the OS, DOS or a `Windows' flavour, `MS-Kermit' _is_ an option!

    ...i suspect the real blockaid($) to be elsewhere... ICMP IGMP
    I tried to discuss the problems related to `ZMoDem'/~TelNet~ a year
    ago. One SysOp who was curious began to investigate and then went away,
    for the holly days... he never resumed the thread; another had trouble
    and finally vanished as well. :( Months later i found another SysOp to
    try to cooperate with; once again, he lost interrest before i could get
    simple answers to my questions - the work was trashed before completion. Whatever the motivation, money or otherwise, i agree it's not there. :(

    But if i had to pay for BBS service, i'd demand for an alternative: `ZMoDem' has been said to often fail over ~TelNet~ and i know it does...

    Salutations, ;-)

    Michel Samson
    a/s Bicephale

    ... Windows made your old AT look better, now it's the other way around!
    --- MultiMail/XT v0.42
    * Origin: BBS Networks @ www.bbsnets.com 808-839-5016 (1:10/345)