Subj : Re: SBBS/W32 Kermit SABOT
To : Stephen Hurd
From : Nancy Backus
Date : Mon Nov 22 2004 11:35 pm
-=> Quoting Stephen Hurd to Michel Samson on 11-09-04 17:19 <=-
SH> I do understand that there are at least a couple people who use Kermit
SH> on a regular basis. For those people, I'm therefore interested in
SH> allowing them to use their protocol of choice. Kermit will never be
SH> the first file transfer tool I reach for, but I can readily understand
SH> that it may the the first one someone else reaches for. My interest is
SH> therefore to provide a useable Kermit file transfer to those people
SH> who use Kermit because they want to.
In my case, until my wizard hubby came up with his replacement for
TCPPort, the only* protocol that I could use with Telnet uploads was
kermit (the slow original), as Zmodem only worked for downloads for me.
And the other X and Ymodem protocols were no better for uploads (didn't
need to try them for downloads).
SH> Personally,
SH> I would believe that these are the people who would have a sane Kermit
SH> implementation... not people using HyperTerminal for example which has
SH> a terrible Kermit implementation.
Again, in my case, being fully in DOS only, I wasn't using HyperTerminal
(holding up crossed forefingers to ward off evil <G>). And my protocol
implementations were in the ConEx I am using.
SH> I have a bit of resistance to providing a 7-bit slow kermit as a
SH> choice... on a telnet connection (which they have) there is no reason
SH> to use a 7-bit paranoid Kermit.
SH> However, I'm even willing to go a step further and provide them with a
SH> 7-bit slow kermit if that's what they want... but I don't want to
SH> promote the use of 7-bit slow kermit in the face of protocols which are
SH> better than 7-bit slow kermit for the purpose of transferring a file
SH> from a BBS over a telnet connection.
In my case, it wasn't what I wanted so much as what I needed. I was
very thankful to find that 7-bit paranoid Kermit available when it was,
so that I was* able to upload my message reply packets, and not have to
enter messages online. Now that hubby has replaced TCPPort in our
set-up with his TelNetPort, things work a lot better, and I can now use
Zmodem for my telnet uploads as well, and still entirely work in DOS. :)
SH> Ideally, I personally feel the
SH> best bet would be to have the choices something like this:
SH> Kermit [7]-bit (Compatible) - SLOW
SH> XModem - SLOW
SH> XModem/1K - Sluggish
SH> YModem - SLOW
SH> YModem/1K - Sluggish
SH> YModem/G - Good
SH> ZModem - Fast
SH> Kermit (Modern) - Fast
SH> So the new user has a resonable chance of picking the appropriate
SH> protocol.
A sysop after my own heart! :) Choices are good. <G> Thank you!
