Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!brutus.cs.uiuc.edu!apple!alan From: alan@Apple.COM (Alan Mimms) Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.programmer Subject: Re: Comm Toolbox: Hypothetical questions Keywords: CommToolBox Message-ID: <5919@internal.Apple.COM> Date: 21 Dec 89 03:29:30 GMT References: <10478@bsu-cs.bsu.edu> Organization: Apple Computer Inc, Cupertino, CA Lines: 77 In article <10478@bsu-cs.bsu.edu> mithomas@bsu-cs.bsu.edu (Michael Thomas Niehaus) writes: >Here are some questions/comments that I have about the Communications Toolbox. >Maybe someone out there can come up with some good hypothetical answers and >comments. > >1. Would it be possible to write an application using two connection tools, > say ADSP and LAT, so that one connection just relayed data to the other? > Since it has been pointed out that the LAT tool will not work over > LocalTalk, it sure would be nice to find a cheap and easy way to > accomplish this (with one Ethernet card and the Internet router). It certainly would be possible. We're adding a convention in which each connection tool will have a resource called 'caps' which defines its capabilities very clearly and also defines the low-level connection transport it uses, using a set of standard names. This can be used by applications to find connection tools that can handle the tasks the application requires and also permits them to determine which tools are, for example, LAT tools... >2. When MacX ships, it will have a MacTCP tools to connect to Unix machines, > I would assume. But what about connecting to a VMS machine to run > a DECwindows session? Does AppleTalk for VMS play some role in this? > How? MacX will ship with a MacTCP tool and an ADSP tool (which is not announced, but I've seen other people talking about it, so I guess it's an open secret at least). Other interesting tools will come from third parties. >3. Has anyone considered that maybe FTP is not a very good file tranfer > protocol? If it is so much trouble to implenent (hypothetically -- I > don't have the slightest idea), maybe you are looking in the wrong place > for the problem. The problem is there are a whole TON of Unix machines that don't grok much other than FTP and rcp for file transfer. Perhaps someone who is looking into this should try the rcp file transfer protocol or some kind of hack using the rmt protocol? >4. How about using the ADSP tool to connect to an A/UX machine (since it > already knows AppleTalk, it may already be able to handle this). If I > could manage this, I could always use Telnet from there. (So it is a bit > of a round-about way. So is a box that just sits there stripping AppleTalk > headers from TCP/IP packets...) There is some talk about doing this. I don't know if it will happen for the next release of A/UX and X for A/UX though. Perhaps if you ask the right folks it could be made to happen? (This is NOT a commitment for this support in ANY version of A/UX -- I just happen to know the lady who's spent a few minutes looking into this and I don't think talking about its possibility here will hurt anything. Please don't get me fired for this!) >So it is finals week here, and I am trying to waste some time... Anyway, any >idea when we will see the final version of the CommToolbox? I would like to get >my hands on a good set of documentation and sample code (1.0B2 just didn't cut >it). Maybe by the time it comes out, I will have amply time to play with it. >(I graduate in May -- any jobs out there? If I don't find one, I'll have all >kinds of time.) Good luck in finals. >-Michael > > >-- >Michael Niehaus UUCP: !{iuvax,pur-ee}!bsu-cs!mithomas >Apple Student Rep ARPA: mithomas@bsu-cs.bsu.edu >Ball State University AppleLink: ST0374 (from UUCP: st0374@applelink.apple.com) -- Alan Mimms My opinions are generally Communications Product Development Group pretty worthless, but Apple Computer they *are* my own... "The company has new jobs and Jobs has a new company" -- Harry Anderson