From owner-freebsd-hackers  Mon Feb 12 14:39:36 1996
Return-Path: owner-hackers
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) id OAA08057
          for hackers-outgoing; Mon, 12 Feb 1996 14:39:36 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rocky.sri.MT.net (rocky.sri.MT.net [204.182.243.10])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) with SMTP id OAA08050
          for <hackers@FreeBSD.org>; Mon, 12 Feb 1996 14:39:32 -0800 (PST)
Received: (from nate@localhost) by rocky.sri.MT.net (8.6.12/8.6.12) id PAA20517; Mon, 12 Feb 1996 15:42:10 -0700
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 1996 15:42:10 -0700
From: Nate Williams <nate@sri.MT.net>
Message-Id: <199602122242.PAA20517@rocky.sri.MT.net>
To: Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org>
Cc: sandy@lapkin.rosprint.ru (Sandy Kovshov), jkh@time.cdrom.com,
        hackers@FreeBSD.org
Subject: Re: CCITT support in current
In-Reply-To: <199602121947.MAA20616@phaeton.artisoft.com>
References: <311F5B56.FF6D5DF@lapkin.rosprint.ru>
	<199602121947.MAA20616@phaeton.artisoft.com>
Sender: owner-hackers@FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

Terry Lambert writes:
> > > It looks like FreeBSD would be the ideal vehicle for a Minitel server,
> > > but it would mean getting the X.25 up to scratch (and conformant with
> > > Transpac, which is based on the 1980 standard).  I remember reading a
> > > while back that somebody was working on this--are you listening,
> > > somebody?  In any case, is anybody else interested in development in
> > > this direction?
> > 
> >   Of course I'm still workin in this direction. But I think what
> >  nobody wants to use it. So it comes to be a private project because
> >  nobody interesting with support for old (?) protocols :(

I think Jordan made it clear that if *someone* is willing to maintain
the code, it is welcome in the tree.  So, if you are willing to fix the
code to work it could end up back into the tree.  Heck, we've gots lots
of 'useless to many folks'/'irreplacable to others' utilities in the
tree. :)

> I think the recent attempt to get rid of XNS is ill-considered.  There
> are still a lot of XNS terminal servers out there.  They are critically
> cheap for a startup ISP.

I think that Terry's recent attempt to sway folks into thinking that
Garrett is going to 'remove' all traces of XNS from public view is
ill-mannerred.  The CVS tree is publically accessible, and contains the
bits if anyone is willing to 'champion' them.

However, until that happens (are you volunteering for it since you see
the obvouis usefulness of the code?) it should not be part of the
normally distributed system.


Nate