> In article <3e4bc312$0$225@hades.is.co.za>,
> eas-lab@absamail.co.za writes:
> > Recently we had a thread about 'stacks' (TCP/IP stacks) ?
>
kers@hplb.hpl.hp.com () wrote:
> No, I don't think so.
>
OK, I found the ref:
From: steve@watchfield.com
Subject: Sockets problem
I'm increasingly suffering from associative memory re. 'words'.
As a long-shot, I tried 'man sockets' under poplog, and was
amazed to get much info.
Only after investigating did I realise that poplog fetches linux mans.
Often poplog is TOO smart. I don't like the 'little man in the box'
(Eliza) approach. This is suitable for kiddies; not for serious researchers
who need to have 'control'. Minimalism should be the aim.
> > I have good reason to investigate PPP.
> >
> > Apparently this can-of-worms/non-trivial subject is closely
> > connected with what was previously called TCP/IP stacks ?
>
> PPP is, if I recall correctly, a TCP/IP-over-a-phone protocol.
>
Then apparently the material on 'sockets' is applicable ?
> > Am I right that poplog has material related to PPP ?
>
> (peering) No.
>
> As usual, Google is your friend: the query
>
> looks to have useful results.
>
Google is good but at certain levels minimalism and focus are required.
> > I have got some of the RFCs, but I first need an overview.
>
To those on poplog who have been discussing sockets:
will poplog's material help me to understand PPP ?
Thanks,
-- Chris Glur.
|