| |
| |
| |
|
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
Comments:
<0> mk 2
<1> bll
<2> afaik they made a working basic PPP stack, partial IP stack with lunix
<0> thought that would be a fun ctcp version reply hehe
<1> bbl*
<2> that runs on the commodore 64
<0> hehe cl***ic
<0> it worked then?
<2> yeah
<2> you could ping it, telnet into it
<0> impressive
<2> it was connected to a 9600 bps PPP link or something..
<2> google for adam dunkel or something I think he is the magician that makes the C64 do incredible things..
<2> dunkels
<2> lives in sweden or something..
<0> pbug your at work right now?
<2> kinda
<2> I work from home
<0> work from home?
<0> alright for some
<0> you on the coffee's today then?
<2> well they want to set me into a different workplace eventually
<2> the work from home isn't working out with my employer
<0> anyone would think for in irc all the time
<0> your
<3> that just means he's infront of a terminal all day
<0> lol
<0> true
<0> may I ask what you do pbug?
<2> I like sharing information, I'm sort of a courier of information
<2> but I'm no hermes
<4> that's either spy or consultant :)
<0> yeah the mind boggles
<0> have you read like ton's of rfc's pbug?
<2> enough to leave me terribly confused
<4> lemme guess you have seen tcp over homing pigeons RFC?
<2> heh yeah that
<2> I once tried keeping up with new rfc's released..
<2> that was in the 2000's somewhere..
<0> i should probably start, where should I begin to learn tcp and protocols?
<0> where does one find rfc's please? A recommend url would be nice
<2> read RFC 791 through 793, read rfc-index.txt read up on udp, read rfc 1122 I think it is.. that's a summary, then use tools such as netstat and tcpdump to make up your own mind, buy a book by richard stevens and you'll be set
<2> rfc-editor.org
<0> a thousand thank yous pbug
<4> reminds me... i'm still stuck at page 28 of 792
<4> that graph has some magic to it :)
<0> page 28 of 792, holy ton's of text
<4> page 28 of rfc792
<4> that one only 91 pages
<0> oh phew
<0> what is the difference between the 2 numbers in the number field?
<0> RFCXXXX STDXXXX
<0> please
<2> RFC stands for request for comment, it's is subcl***ed between experimental and standard, and that's what STD stands for, it's an Internet Standard
<2> a standard must be adhered to on the Internet, however people cheat nowadays because it's not profitable to adhere to it always
<0> i should read both?
<2> cutting corners in other words
<0> or just the rfc one?
<2> some things are totally uninteresting because they are not applied on todays internet
<2> like multicasting.. noone wants to do it because it means more load on their routers
<2> and because someone can stream internet radio to millions of people from their 56K dial-in modem
<2> power structure is out of whack in that scenario that's why they don't do it
<2> people who are poor are that for a reason right?!
<2> so they should have no right to broadcast their opinion to millions of people
<2> or whatever...
<0> ill stick to the rfc then
<2> yeah which one?
<0> the ones you stated
<2> the standard is the same as the RFC it's indicated on the top
<0> ok cheers
<2> just saying some RFC's are worthless to read, even though their technology is amazing, it doesn't fit into a cl*** based society
<0> that could be fastinating
<0> ever come around anything weird and wonderful?
<0> grr, i need to get a grip with my grammer
<0> pbug: do you mind the book 'TCP/IP Illustrated, Vol1: The protocols' by richard stevens
<0> mean blah
<2> the TCP/IP's Illustrated are a good series, one of my employer had it in their library, I never bought it.. the unix network programming books were good for me, as I was also interested in writing C programs
<2> when you write the C code to networking you get a different feel for the whole thing.. a different understanding
<2> that's why dhartmei rocks when he talks about networking
<0> i better start with the basics, you've given me a great starting point
<0> i thank you
<2> np
<0> first rfc, 45 pages, not so bad
<0> here goes
<2> :)
<2> 1122 and 1123 are a great sum-up of all the RFC related to networking, since they quote RFCS directly you can use that as a start-off point
<2> and then go deeper into the specific protocols
<2> now 1122 is very old.. from the 80's I think..
<2> rfc-index should show updates
<0> ok ill get 1123 aswell, so are the others :)
<0> some of them
<0> new word catenet? hmm
<0> right no more talk from me until it's finished
<2> there is possibly an explanation on terms somewhere otherwise go rob some books out of your local universities bookstore
<2> computer science section
<2> they tolerated me there for years, until they for SOME reason opened the department of psychiatry right near the entrance
<2> now I only do fly-bys when I'm in the area which is like very seldom
<5> morning, for those of you in US
<5> i'm playing a bit with Automator actions now, and want to feed an output of "Get Files" action to a bash command.
<5> found on Apple site that they use "$@" convention to p*** arguments to the command
<5> is it something common for the shell, or just Apple's thing?
<5> for instance, find "$@" ...
<6> hi
<6> is there a scandisk-liked util for Unix?
<5> fsck
<5> daYZman: do `man fsck` to see more
<0> I should of read these rfc's years ago
<2> you can download them all and then you can grep through them... ftp.isi.edu/in-notes/ prompt, mget rfc*.txt
<2> grep is a very helpful tool when reading source and rfcs
<7> grep is useful for that
<0> lol how many?
<2> some 3000 I do not know how many exactly, haven't read new rfc's in a while, the stuff is complex these days.. voip and such things
<2> on DSL it's a half hour download or something..
<7> my favourite RFC is telnet
<2> dianora: yeah it's pretty cool, I did read that when I wrote a telnet compliant client
<7> I only read enough so I could turn echo off
<2> well compliant to the few functions like ECHO and such..
<2> :)
<0> ill look at the one
<7> :-) yepp
<2> HAVEECHO and NEEDECHO
<2> something like that..
<0> i can honestly say that this unixhelp channel has some of the most help and friendly people I have ever encountered on the internet
<2> until we die
<0> then I'll see you in hell.... joke
<2> :)
<0> one would think that fragmentation does not exist much anymore?
<2> ufs doesn't fragement all that much.. part of the design
<0> i shouldn't be understanding this rfc but I think I am!
<2> I think I'm coming down with cancer next..
<2> oh well..
<2> or my mind will completely explode..
<0> hehe :p
<8> i want to have netcat listening on port whatever, when someone connects to it it will run a simple program that returns output. At the firewall i'll allow only 1 machine to access this port on the server. Does this sound safe enough?
<2> rob: yes
<2> it's safer when the port is TCP
<2> otherwise it's a man-in-middle attack, or you use dull sequence numbers
<0> lol
<2> one nice option packet filter has is modulating sequence numbers for hosts that are weak by design
<2> it basically acts like a proxy/man-in-middle and translates sequence numbers
<9> morning
<0> hey
<0> do rfc's exist for border gateway and cisco protocols?
<0> was going to check through the 3000 but thought it might be quicker to ask
<0> ill use common sense, forget I asked
<0> hmm, Time to live, that's got to be important, sound to me that without it the internet would just grind to a halt
<0> with a maximum TOL that is
<0> without a maximum TTL, datagrams would never be destored...hmm
<0> holy moley, could it be that I'm actually going to understand how a packet of data of constructed
<0> this rfc is trying to defeat me, but it won't
Return to
#unixhelp
or
Go to some related
logs:
#beginner
#politics
#windows
#firebird
#firebird
HD44LPW62
#tcl
#hardware
#beginner
RG-69 cable
|
|