On Tue, 2008-11-04 at 16:43 +0000, Beartooth wrote: > This is the second half of a reply to Craig White's post below, > put into a new thread because it has departed so far from the original > topic. I'm discovering great new stuff -- new to me, that is -- and I > want to draw maximal attention to it from others who may be in shoes like > mine. > > On Mon, 03 Nov 2008 15:08:11 -0700, Craig White wrote: > [...] > > I fear that you still don't get it. > > > > This is a rather cool blog about 'Trivial uses for Telnet'... > > http://evolvedcode.net/content/doc_alttelnet/ > > > > which talks about how to use telnet client application to connect to a > > web server or a pop3 server or an smtp server and talk to the server as > > if you were just another application communicating with that server so > > you can test things out or just familiarize yourself with the process > > itself. > > Indeed! I just sang its praises in the first half of this reply, > on the original thread. > > > Obviously telnet to the cups port (631) is very much similar as the > > others (SMTP/POP3/HTTP) except that like the others, the cups server has > > its own vocabulary. > > Ah, if only I had known, back when I was teaching baby language > courses, what vast argots the various branches of Computer Science would > develop -- once it came into existence, of course. > > > In essence, every time you open a web browser and tell it to go to a > > specific web site, you are doing something similar to opening a > > connection to that web site with telnet on port 80 (ignoring of course > > the web browser rendering engine, javascript, etc.). > > Ignoring a lot of things I wouldn't know if they bit me never > mind where, to be sure. > > But in the present context, there seem to be some I can't ignore > -- some that (afaict) reflect the settings on my terminal, and some that > are apparently matters of notation and vocabulary. > > Thus for instance, following along the second paragraph, about > NetCat -- or rather, trying to follow -- I get this : > > ===== ===== ===== ===== > telnet> NC -v -v {address} {port}^[[D^[[D^[[D^H^H^H^H^H^[[3~^C > [btth@Hbsk ~]$ telnet > telnet> ^[[A^[[D^C > [btth@Hbsk ~]$ NC -v -v 192.168.0.8 631 > bash: NC: command not found > [btth@Hbsk ~]$ telnet > telnet> NC -v -v 192.168.0.8 631 > ?Invalid command > telnet> NC -v -v {192.168.0.8} {631} > ?Invalid command > telnet> > ===== ===== ===== ===== > > If only by trial and error, I think I can set up a different > terminal emulation (xterm instead of my usual gnome terminal, for > instance, which is configured primarily for Alpine), and avoid all that > gibberish caused by trying to use the backspace and arrow keys. > > But it isn't obvious to me, unless I haven't had enough coffee > yet, why the last two commands are both invalid. All that's obvious is > that, despite Mr. Welsh's exemplary lucidity, I am reading his text > otherwise than he expects. ---- the author was writing from a 'Windows' perspective and Windows and Macintosh are not case-sensitive operating systems. The command telnet or TELNET or TeLnEt on Windows would launch the same telnet program as case has no meaning on Windows. On Linux, you would have to have an exact match because telnet, TELNET and TeLnEt are potentially 3 different programs and only an exact match would matter. The command nc (or NC in the case insensitive Windows world), refers to the 'netcat' program which is a telnet on super steroids. I would suggest that for the time being at least, you ignore netcat and just use telnet. Craig -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
