[The previous message concludes here.]                               8/8

Wilfred van Velzen                                                   (1)
Re: soup2pkt/uka_ppp                      | 1998-10-06 22h25:40
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
     There are many ways to contemplate history, some individuals retain
names and build constructs from details hardly related to one's concepts
or similar items on which other users would typically focus.  I verified
the ~URL~s i published, they're valid and it's up to each of us to check
for himself what our `FidoNet_DOS-INet' echo was actually made up before
this discussion (which is rather peculiar for our "technically oriented"
echo) leads to statements posing as absolutes or whatever...  Luckily, a
few `FdN' archives seem to resurface from time to time;  the four months
fragment (from the 1st address) or the somewhat bigger chunk (when using
the 2nd address for access to many more echos) are real-life examples...

     Those who can't find their answers in the present might get some in
the past!  Isn't it time to seek and share such archives while we can!?!

                                  %^)

     Ha, now it reminds me!  When it comes to seeking or sharing, euh...
Some individuals are more willing than others so it seems like a perfect
opportunity to fix a few misconceptions.  Sorry folks but this statement
taken from its primary source clears the fuss around why `MS-Kermit' was
said not to work in a `Win 32' DOS box...  %-b  The excerpt here is from
`.\NETWORKS\SetUp.DOC' (a 66353 bytes files dated June 9, 2002), chapter
5 is titled "ACCESSING EXTERNAL TCP/IP PROTOCOL STACKS" and says
"Kermit
is a DOS program, 16-bit Windows-aware, but not a pure Windows program."
(yet, that doesn't tell if it fails).  The situation clarifies with this
other mention:  "it cannot use the various 32-bit Winsock Windows TCP/IP
implementations", euh...  Now, right from the `FidoNet_DOS-INet' archive
to which i refered in the begining, there's a post made by James Bendall
on December 18, 1998 that answers to Tony Langdon's question of December
15...  The `Win 2K' power-user who repeatedly complains that `MS-Kermit'
wouldn't work for him and who claimed to keep extensive EchoMail records
might want to test for us the possible solution found in the answer from
James Bendall (but of course, i got a hint that's no priority to him)...

                                  P->

     The updated release of `MS-Kermit v3.14' which contains the REVISED
DOCUMENTATION (to account for `Win-16' vs `Win-32' differences) is here:

          ftp://kermit.columbia.edu/kermit/archives/msk314.zip
           (677 Kb, November 7, 2002 - `PKZip v2.0')

                                  ;^)

     In short, vague "no-can-do" arguments are too easy.  Not having the
`Win 2K' OS installed i could have concluded that `MS-Kermit' won't load
in a `Win 2K' DOS box when i read Steven last year.  Maybe i'll get some
better picture which doesn't sound like misinformation one day?  %,-D ))

     Now, lets get even deeper!  This time i'll deal with credentials as
it has been another major mainstream topic during the last few months...

                                  %-b,

     Joe R. Doupnik is often accused of partly using source-code created
by Erick Engelke and i know for a fact that these allegations are denied
whenever Doupnik is given a chance...  :>  It hapens that `NDIS3Pkt.COM'
(from `NDIS3NT.ZIP') by Dan Lanciani and which Bendall was suggesting to
Langdon brings back more reminiscence to me...  Dan Lanciani contributed
to the `MS-Kermit' project in his time, it might be VERY INTERRESTING to
ask him what actually remained of Engelke's code i think:  it dates from
1991!  Anyway, here's another ~URL~:  www.danlan.com/ndis3nt/ndis3nt.zip

                                  8^)

     The conspiration theories and "no-can-do" laming obscured what once
was a nice echo (quite too often to my taste, especially when i consider
we had plenty of variety, will, curiosity and experience in comparison)!

                                  8,-(

     The samples saved by Clarke for our convenience only tell a part of
the whole story and i sincerely wish we could all have access to more!!!

     In any case, here's a last reminder before i go.  This one is about
where to find `Waterloo FTP v0.7' exactly, and why...  Some more ~URL~s:

          ftp://mvmpc9.ciw.uni-karlsruhe.de/tcp_ip/wattcp/apps/ftp.exe
           (185 Kb, September 15, 1994)

          ftp://mvmpc9.ciw.uni-karlsruhe.de/dos_apps/ftp/ftp07.zip
           (54 Kb, January 20, 1995 - keep `FTP.DOC', discard `FTP.EXE')
                                                      ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
                                                         .--------'
     I'd find many versions of `WatTCP v0.7' out there!  |  One did work
well enough for me over the years, another (above) didn't.  BBSers who'd
try `WatTCP v0.7' can use the 188800 bytes executable (from `Apps.ZIP').

                                         Salutations,  :)

                                         Michel Samson
                                         a/s Bicephale
                                         http://www.iquebec.com/dos-inet
                                         (UserName="U" and
PassWord="P")


... Using `MS-DOS v7.10a'+`LSPPP v0.8'+`RLFossil v1.2'+`{Commo} v7.7'...
--- MultiMail/XT v0.42 - Numbers might make BBSing UNIVERSAL, not sugar!