> Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2003 06:26:18 +1000 > From: Peter Jeremy <PeterJeremy_at_optushome.com.au> > Sender: owner-freebsd-current_at_freebsd.org > > > MOP (as you point out later) or LAT have the advantage of being more > standard, but I'm not sure how well documented they are. MOP is well documented. It is actually two protocols, one for download (MOP/DL similar to bootp) and one for remote console (MOP/RC). Both are very well and openly documented, but I left all of my documentation at a former job thinking that I was unlikely to ever care about MOP again. But I'm sure some of my old DECnet buddies still have it. (Note that while MOP was included under the DECnet umberella, it is really totally separate from anything else in DECnet and I think pre-existed DECnet Phase II. LAT was officially a proprietary protocol and, while quite efficient, makes several assumptions about network characteristics that make it poorly suited to general use. (I assume HP now owns LAT.) I'd vote for MOP/RC as a simple protocol that is designed for exactly this purpose. -- R. Kevin Oberman, Network Engineer Energy Sciences Network (ESnet) Ernest O. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (Berkeley Lab) E-mail: oberman_at_es.net Phone: +1 510 486-8634Received on Tue Oct 21 2003 - 11:41:01 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:37:26 UTC