Return to BSD News archive
Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!bunyip.cc.uq.oz.au!munnari.oz.au!spool.mu.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!news.mathworks.com!zombie.ncsc.mil!golf!news
From: johnam@dsusmail.dsus.datastorm.com
Newsgroups: comp.os.386bsd.questions
Subject: telnetd and CR-LF translations
Date: Tue, 06 Dec 94 13:44:52 PST
Organization: Datastorm
Lines: 40
Message-ID: <3c2e56$i8e@golf.ustores.missouri.edu>
Reply-To: johnam@dsusmail.dsus.datastorm.com
NNTP-Posting-Host: 198.209.154.125
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.93.0
Strange problem from Telnet. We here at Datastorm have developed and are
releasing a Telnet module for Procomm Plus for Windows 2.1. While I was
working on this project, I installed and used NetBSD 0.9 for testing. I
must say I have been very happy with it. One problem we encountered with
X,Y and Zmodem testing was uploading and downloading.
The downloading problem we fixed simply by issuing an 8-bit data option
before a transfer and then reverting at the end of a xfer.
However, if we are uploading, this helps BUT we still have problems. We
discovered that text file containing <CR><LF> pairs ended up on the host
with just <CR> after a painful transfer. However, a file with just <CR>
xfered just fine with no errors. So in a generic case of a binary or
ASCII file, if there is a byte sequence of 0x0D 0x0A in the data or CRC
we'll fail or anybody else will fail. So, is there a solution, a
negotiation we missed or what? At the very least, it seems that when
BSD telnetd goes into a 8-bit mode, this <CR><LF> translation should be
turned off. Just to let you know, we were able to get X,Y,and Zmodem to
work on some other UNIX machines.
So why am I concerned:
1) it's a bug in BSD (or so it seems) and I'll like to see it fixed since
BSD is such a fine system.
2) Compuserve uses BSDI as their Telnet server and we can't do CIS B+
uploads. We just hate to tell users that they can use CIS B+
to down load but to upload, they must use the slower Kermit.
Since it appear not be our fault, we hate to point fingers at
CompuServe and BSDI, we feel everything should work right.
3) We just can't expect users to hack their telnetd to fix the problem.
4) If we can fix the problem on our end, we'll do it!
I never got the chance to test FreeBSD or the newest NetBSD 1.0, there's
only so much time in a year ;-) so I'm just assuming the problem is still
prevalent in them both.
Please E-mail me on thoughts, feelings and ideas.
Thanks
John Maier
(johnam@dsusmail.dsus.datastorm.com)
The patch from Procomm for Windows 2.0 to 2.1 will be available soon, so
if you're interested, I'll try to get them to you as soon as they are
available. (Telnet and FTP will only be available in 2.1)