Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uwm.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!mips!news.cs.indiana.edu!maytag!xenitec!zswamp!root
From: root@zswamp.fidonet.org (Geoffrey Welsh)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Re: Slip over T1000's
Message-ID: <7182.28014A86@zswamp.fidonet.org>
Date: 8 Apr 91 17:48:23 GMT
Organization: Izot's Swamp BBS - Kitchener, Ontario
Lines: 26

REGISTER,ANDREW H (ar12@prism.gatech.EDU ) wrote:

 >This is the first time I have heard of SLIP spoofing.  What 
 >is it and how does it help?

   Not too long ago there was a discussion here in which it was explained why 
SLIP spoofing is not viable.  It all boils down to the fact that IP demands 
end to end acknowledgement of datagrams, and spoofing is a direct 
contradiction of that.

 >Any comments about what works best for SLIP (ie. such as the 
 >previous V.32 comment) will be appreciated.

   It seems that symmetrical data channels (i.e. V.32 or V.32bis, not PEP, 
HST, or V-9600) offer much better SLIP performance.  All other major 
condiderations (e.g. baud rate) are obvious.
 

--  
UUCP:     watmath!xenitec!zswamp!root | 602-66 Mooregate Crescent
Internet: root@zswamp.fidonet.org     | Kitchener, Ontario
FidoNet:  SYSOP, 1:221/171            | N2M 5E6 CANADA
Data:     (519) 742-8939              | (519) 741-9553
The mile is traversed not by a single leap, but by a procession of coherent 
steps; those who insist on making the trip in a single element will be
failing long after you and I have discovered new worlds. -- me