Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

a Test

Expand Messages
  • Tom Kessler
    Hi guys this is a test
    Message 1 of 107 , Oct 30, 1996
    • 0 Attachment
      Hi guys this is a test
    • Steve Alexander
      ... I think the issue probably has more to do with interpreting what the urgent pointer means. If I remember correctly, 793 was ambiguous (it said two
      Message 107 of 107 , Feb 19, 1997
      • 0 Attachment
        der Mouse <mouse@...> writes:
        >I don't think there _is_ any "correctly". TCP does not have OOB. What
        >it has is an urgent pointer. Some grad student who must have been
        >either on drugs or on a minimal understanding of TCP thought it would
        >be useful to take the byte the urgent pointer points to and treat it as
        >a byte in an out-of-band channel.

        I think the issue probably has more to do with interpreting what the urgent
        pointer means. If I remember correctly, 793 was ambiguous (it said two
        different things in two different places) and BSD picked the "wrong" one
        (having just re-read it, I probably would have too). If you follow 1122, then
        you disagree with BSD by one byte, which is a real pain. I don't know why the
        authors of 1122 didn't just admit defeat and codify the BSD practice ;->.

        -- Steve
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.