 | | Re: VT100 over the web
|
| (...) (24 years ago, 21-Jun-00, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
| | | | | Re: VT100 over the web
|
| (...) Yeah, when is that? Not too far off, if I remember correctly. No help for today, however. :-P Cheers, - jsproat (24 years ago, 21-Jun-00, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
| | | | | Re: VT100 over the web
|
| (...) September 20, 2000. (24 years ago, 21-Jun-00, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
| | | | | RSA patents (Was: VT100 over the web)
|
| (...) Now, does anyone honestly believe that RSA will just let benefits from the patent just lapse? It's their #1 ticket, the cream of their crop, their reason for being. I'm sure there's something lurking within the DMCA (1) that would allow them (...) (24 years ago, 21-Jun-00, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
| | | | | Re: VT100 over the web
|
| (...) This may turn out to be a non issue for this client. I need to follow up on Sproat's pointers to other Java solutions but the Mindterm suggestion (which both Matt and Sproat made, independently, I believe) is an excellent one and I appreciate (...) (24 years ago, 22-Jun-00, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
| | | | | Re: VT100 over the web
|
| (...) Hmmm. I wonder (strictly for the sake of wondering) is it illegal to use the entire Mindterm package in the U.S., or just the bits that use the RSA algorithm? i.e., if a USian uses just the VT320 stuff and not the ssh stuff, is it legal? What (...) (24 years ago, 22-Jun-00, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
| | | | | Re: VT100 over the web
|
| (...) I assume that this would be specific to the program they're using, not a generic telnet<->http.... (24 years ago, 22-Jun-00, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
| | | | | Re: VT100 over the web
|
| (...) I have a few thoughts about this. If the telnet / VT100 throughput has a well- defined format, then such a gateway could use expect (or something like it) and serve HTML forms instead of relying upon the user to enter keystrokes. A side (...) (24 years ago, 22-Jun-00, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
| |
