Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 13:21:44 -0500 From: "Jacques A. Vidrine" <n@nectar.com> To: Gordon Tetlow <gordont@bluemtn.net> Cc: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: telnet to AF_UNIX sockets [PATCH] Message-ID: <20010524132144.A14177@shade.nectar.com> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.33.0105241105210.76720-100000@sdmail0.sd.bmarts.com>; from gordont@bluemtn.net on Thu, May 24, 2001 at 11:10:10AM -0700 References: <20010523220844.A26487@shade.nectar.com> <Pine.BSF.4.33.0105241105210.76720-100000@sdmail0.sd.bmarts.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
[cc: trimmed]
On Thu, May 24, 2001 at 11:10:10AM -0700, Gordon Tetlow wrote:
> It depends on how you look at it. If you see telnet as a network client,
> then you cringe at this (I did initially). But when you think about it,
> all telnet really does is connect to sockets, so why not extend its
> functionality to local sockets?
Because `all telnet really does is connect to sockets' is patently
false. Check out the nearly 100 RFCs detailing the TELNET protocol.
Almost none of these make much sense to do over UNIX domain sockets
[1].
A small tool that `just connects to sockets' would certainly be handy.
However, that's why there are things such as netcat.
Cheers,
--
Jacques Vidrine / n@nectar.com / jvidrine@verio.net / nectar@FreeBSD.org
[1] I think it was Peter who did mention one application of this (NVT
over AF_UNIX), which would be for communication with `jails'.
This is pretty specialized, and requires a telnet daemon that
listens on AF_UNIX as well.
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20010524132144.A14177>