peter_easthope at gulfnet.sd64.bc.ca
Fri Jan 3 02:05:44 CET 2003
Edgar Schwarz wrote:
es> Doesn't hurt as it is but I changed it now to:
Thanks. These refinements really do help to make the
source more readable.
es> I'm thinking of where to put it. Because I don't think
it's necessary at the moment to send an update to ETH
just for documentation.
"Contributions" area at the ETH or your own server?
es> ... send me your stuff and I can put it on my site
as a version under development before sending it to
Right oh. Notes on troubleshooting the physical
layer and a few other details are in progress.
Also, I want to have a try at English translations
for the source comments currently in German.
Give me a few more days.
Chris Glur wrote:
cg> Thanks for pioneering this.
Welcome. Time is available and the problem won't solve
cg> It would be interesting/valuable to see a few steps
of explanation eg:
automaton1, automaton2, corresponding trace/log;
with reference to the appropiate RFC(s).
Will do what I can.
cg> * I've got a problem with PPP.Tool:
it breaks the (apparently unwritten) rule that *.Tool is a list of
mnemonics with minimum explanitory text.
cg> (I think also that *.Tool should be specified as viewable under the
'minimum' system: via Edit.Open and with UserTrack char width
as per minimum/default - VGA, I guess).
cg> Its not clear what the useful text of presently named PPP.Tool should
be called; perhaps PPP.Text ?
cg> ... assumption that char "@" (and perhaps other chars) are not part
of the ISP login 2 parameters: userID and Userpassword strings;
Comments relevant to this are in the notes going to Edgar.
Seems that ultimately we need a generalization/extension
of the SetUser syntax condoned and incorporated by the ETH.
FWIIW, LCP and PAP now appear to negotiate OK and I am
working on the IPCP negotiation.
Regards, Peter E.
More information about the Oberon