Hi Ben,

     About "SBBS & MS-Kermit" of July 28:

BR> I noticed G-Kermit...  The C-Kermit make process aborted using the
BR> Linux+OpenSSL option so I built an un-secure version to play...
MS> Oh, i thought there were equivalents to executables?
BR> ...automated File Transfer only.  I am testing C-Kermit 8.0.209
BR> (March 2003) under Mandrake Linux as it does so much and I needed a
BR> reliable Telnet client.  It even has a Daemon mode (IKSD) that
BR> provides a Telnet + Kermit SERVER under Linux.

     No doubt `C-Kermit' is very well featured, and bloated as a result:
this 'nix version, as you've noticed, is quite "alive" after all!  :)  I
believe ~SSL~ may not be totaly full-proof (in general) but, appart from
security considerations, the SoftWare accumulated decades of know-how!!!

     This ~IKSD~ server is potentially capable to compete with ~FTP~ and
there used to be a demo system to demonstrate it's capabilities but that
was taken off-line for a lack of fund$$$ (a constant preoccupation which
most likely undermines the efforts of a few `Kermit' coders by diverting
their attention, i'm afraid).  A lot was accomplished, nonetheless.  :-)

MS> Yes, if i'm not mistaking `K95' happens to have ~FTP~ integrated...
BR> ...though K95 is the only one that isn't free.

     One is out of luck if he needs `K95' for that purpose but there's a
tiny FreeWare which i evaluated lately that's very light and where i was
able to find a quite potent 3rd-party implementation - the 1st i've ever
seen to be this decent in my life.  As you may have read in a late post,
it's from Wayne Warthen (http://kermit.wwarthen.com);  the author sounds
quite proud of the ~VT-102~ support, from what i can read.  I believe it
is perfect for a `Win 16/32' user who wishes to experience the same-name
file transfer protocol without having to worry about size and license...

     `ZMoDem' code from an outside source was added to `K95' so, even if
"The Team" wanted to let go with their fund$ campaign, euh...  i have to
wonder about this specific part which i can't seem to remember too well.

     Hummm...  But of course, finding `Windows' ~FTP~ substitute clients
is no problem at all, really...  I don't know much about `Linux' but, if
i were to need an ~FTP~ client for DownLoads only, `Lynx' would be a 1st
option since it has that sort of support built in and so much more.  :-)

     In the context of a multiple OS BBS system i guess `C-Kermit' might
be more suitable though, especially when one already trusts `Linux'.  :)

MS> ...then you're quite familiar (or have been)...
BR> Actually, my BBS software only allowed Text mode transfers as it was
BR> mainly for messaging, not files.

     Oh?  What about a .QWK door, your people use to post On-Line then!?

     Text-mode is nice under `Kermit' when people need to translate text
from one character set to another (different environments) but if it's a
substitute for `ZMoDem' only then Binary mode has a few advantages;  i'd
be surprized someone would require text mode, otherwise.  I'm curious...

MS> Would you happen to be using `WC-4'?
BR> Yes!  I have it configured so I can bring it up...  Once the BBS is
BR> up (WC 4.20SL) it works exactly the same under all platforms...

     As you can imagine, it's the LEGACY ~FOSSIL~ support in it that i'm
particularily fond of:  it's a candidate for an `MS-Kermit' installation
and i've seen the transfer protocol in action (but it didn't last long)!

     I tried to have a "Ready-Made" install kit for the SysOp community,
so that a top notch `MS-Kermit' genuine implementation is made available
to a few of them and we can forget about the reputation of the 3rd-party
brain-dead pre-1985 ones, at last.  The damage must be counter-balanced,
the typical response when `Kermit' is mentioned is negative - to say the
least!  Cooperation between me and a `WC-4' SysOp took place in 2001 and
i've been waiting for a re-match since then because testing stopped when
difficulties were encountered:  the `Kermit' option got removed but i've
had preliminary results;  the configuration was never published, though.

     I've had other equally _short_ subsequent contacts but each time it
seemed more information was gathered and now i feel quite ready.  If you
have your BBS installed on a ~LAN~ (not ~TelNet~) you may be interested.

BR> ...FIDOnet under DOS...  Linux is next...  ...I'm only Dial-up...

     In that case, unless you or your people need character translation,
euh...  `ZMoDem' would probably be more popular but you've wrote there's
no Binary transfers happening so even this one might not be very useful.

     Cross-platform ~TelNet~ contexts is where `Kermit' shines the most.

BR> Post the INI or Netmail it and I'll look it over at least.

     Well, to be honest, i was about to post the latest findings anyway.

     I found out that `FidoNet' could have a good memory lately so there
is a chance for someone who wants it to gather the information even in a
year...  No need to be around, i simply hope at least a few persons will
eventually question the persistent preconceptions around `Kermit' and be
critic enough to evaluate it all *BY THEMSELVES*.  I'd love to hear of a
related topic but at least i can walk away and still be satisfied that i
done my humble user share to promote LEGACY BBSing (follows right next)!

                                                       Salutations,  ;-)

                                                       Michel Samson
                                                       a/s Bicephale


... DOS+TCP/IP+TelNet+Kermit+.QWK technologies will run on XTs or better
--- MultiMail/XT v0.42 - Yes!  TelNet OLMR BBSing CAN be made UNIVERSAL!