Re: terminal without telnet

On 4/5/19 4:54 PM, kerravon86-/[email protected] [hercules-390] wrote:
> A device that converts a "WRITE" CCW into a TCP/IP "send" socket 
> call. Ditto for READ. No telnet negotiation done when there is a socket 
> connect either.

I'm guessing from PDOS's point of view, it has no idea that TCP/IP is 
involved.  PDOS probably thinks that it's a connected device.  It's 
actually the emulator that's putting the data stream into TCP/IP.

> I'm not sure how that fits in. I looked it up in Wikipedia but I'm 
> still unsure.

I'm quite confident that most Internet application protocols use NVT. 
But that is no guarantee that what you're doing does so.  In fact, it 
sounds like it's not using NVT.

> You can communicate to any unusual device so long as it has a TCP/IP 
> connection.

Okay.

> Yes, that's correct, but the serial port that pdpser writes to is actually 
> a TCP/IP port because it's running under qemu.

How are you creating the port in Qemu?

Quickly glancing at things, it looks like Qemu's -serial supports (raw) 
"tcp" -and- "telnet".  It also looks like the difference between the two 
is the former does not include Telnet's auto-negotiation and the latter 
does.

So, is there a possibility that you can change how Qemu behaves to be 
compatible with Hercules and it's existing 1052 device?

> I'm not sure about that.
> 
> Anyway, no-one has named a non-telnet device number/name I can define 
> under Hercules, so I'll assume it doesn't already exist and add it to 
> Hercules/380 so that I can communicate with PDOS/386 running pdpser. I'll 
> see if I can add a "notelnet" option to the 1052, and that can be the 
> basis of the raw TCP/IP.

Good luck.



-- 
Grant. . . .
unix || die



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]