"nelso...@gmail.com" <nelsonse48@gmail.com> writes:
I want to telnet from my rpi (buster) to another computer as a 'VT100'
(or similar, vt102 etc) terminal. I don't want to mess up my
lxterminal for rpi use. Suggestions?
Isn’t xterm a superset of vt100? I’m not sure why you think you need to do anything special.
On 29.7.21 22.12, nelso...@gmail.com wrote:
I want to telnet from my rpi (buster) to another computer as a 'VT100'
(or similar, vt102 etc) terminal. I don't want to mess up my
lxterminal for rpi use. Suggestions?
--Steve
It seems that a Telnet client is not in the standard install
of Raspbian (Raspi OS). You can install it:
sudo apt install telnet
After installation, just start it from the terminal:
telnet tar_get_machine_ip_or_name
For connecting to another computer, you do not need
the Telnet server (daemon).
On 2021-07-30 10:40 a.m., Tauno Voipio wrote:
On 29.7.21 22.12, nelso...@gmail.com wrote:
I want to telnet from my rpi (buster) to another computer as a 'VT100'
(or similar, vt102 etc) terminal. I don't want to mess up my
lxterminal for rpi use. Suggestions?
--Steve
It seems that a Telnet client is not in the standard install
of Raspbian (Raspi OS). You can install it:
sudo apt install telnet
After installation, just start it from the terminal:
telnet tar_get_machine_ip_or_name
For connecting to another computer, you do not need
the Telnet server (daemon).
For modern purposes you really shouldn't be using telnet. You can enable >vt100 emulation mode in most ssh software - for instance putty offers
vt100 compatibility mode in the "settings" panel. kterm also offers
vt100 mode via a command flag iirc.
I'm pretty sure that's widespread knowledge by now...has been for probabbly at least 20 years. That said, there are plenty of devices out there that don't support ssh: old 8-bit computers serving up a BBS
through an ESP8266 on the serial port, not-so-old managed network
accessed from outside our network, for instance), the world isn't going
to end if you telnet in to something.
_/_
/ v \ Scott Alfter (remove the obvious to send mail)
(IIGS( https://alfter.us/ Top-posting!
\_^_/ >What's the most annoying thing on Usenet?
there are plenty of devices out there that don't support ssh: old 8-bit computers serving up a BBS through an ESP8266 on the serial port
Scott Alfter wrote:
there are plenty of devices out there that don't support ssh: old 8-bit
computers serving up a BBS through an ESP8266 on the serial port
The ESP could handle the SSH and just send/receive terminal traffic on
the serial port ... I don't know if puTTY's ANSI emulation is as good as telix/procomm?
On a public network - well if people are to be believed every man and
his dog from the CCP to the CIA are sniffing everything, so remember to
put on a good show with lots of references to assassinating the
president and starting a Jihad in your local boy scout camp.
On Mon, 18 Oct 2021 13:19:28 +0100
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
On a public network - well if people are to be believed every man and
his dog from the CCP to the CIA are sniffing everything, so remember to
put on a good show with lots of references to assassinating the
president and starting a Jihad in your local boy scout camp.
Did the semtex arrive safely ? The plutonium is delayed a bit but
it will be coming. Anthrax is out of stock I'm afraid.
On 18/10/2021 14:27, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
On Mon, 18 Oct 2021 13:19:28 +0100Well there is a local shortage of revolutionaries anyway, so we are in
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
On a public network - well if people are to be believed every man and
his dog from the CCP to the CIA are sniffing everything, so remember to >>> put on a good show with lots of references to assassinating the
president and starting a Jihad in your local boy scout camp.
Did the semtex arrive safely ? The plutonium is delayed a bit but
it will be coming. Anthrax is out of stock I'm afraid.
no hurry...
On Mon, 18 Oct 2021 14:59:21 +0100
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
On 18/10/2021 14:27, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
On Mon, 18 Oct 2021 13:19:28 +0100Well there is a local shortage of revolutionaries anyway, so we are in
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
On a public network - well if people are to be believed every man and
his dog from the CCP to the CIA are sniffing everything, so remember to >>>> put on a good show with lots of references to assassinating the
president and starting a Jihad in your local boy scout camp.
Did the semtex arrive safely ? The plutonium is delayed a bit but
it will be coming. Anthrax is out of stock I'm afraid.
no hurry...
Really? There doesn't seem to be a shortage of revolting people round here.
In article <c87cc99f-5fb5-2988-ac09-c979633def6e@nimbulus.xyz>,
randon <randon@nimbulus.xyz> wrote:
For modern purposes you really shouldn't be using telnet.
I'm pretty sure that's widespread knowledge by now...has been for probabbly at least 20 years. That said, there are plenty of devices out there that don't support ssh: old 8-bit computers serving up a BBS through an ESP8266
on the serial port, not-so-old managed network equipment (I have a bunch of older Cisco gear at work that doesn't speak ssh), etc. As long as you're aware of the security implications and take steps to mitigate what you can (those switches at work can't be accessed from outside our network, for instance), the world isn't going to end if you telnet in to something.
On a switched network, you can't.
Wifi is more problematic, but its fairly well encrypted.
Really? There doesn't seem to be a shortage of revolting people round
here.
For modern purposes you really shouldn't be using telnet.
You can
enable vt100 emulation mode in most ssh software - for instance putty
offers vt100 compatibility mode in the "settings" panel. kterm also
offers vt100 mode via a command flag iirc.
On 18/10/2021 08:41, Andy Burns wrote:
Scott Alfter wrote:
there are plenty of devices out there that don't support ssh: old
8-bit computers serving up a BBS through an ESP8266 on the serial
port
The ESP could handle the SSH and just send/receive terminal traffic
on the serial port ... I don't know if puTTY's ANSI emulation is as
good as telix/procomm?
Telnet was dangerous on a student network formed of coaxial
cable...you could sniff passwords.
On a switched network, you can't.
Wifi is more problematic, but its fairly well encrypted.
On a public network - well if people are to be believed every man and
his dog from the CCP to the CIA are sniffing everything, so remember
to put on a good show with lots of references to assassinating the
president and starting a Jihad in your local boy scout camp.
randon <randon@nimbulus.xyz> wrote:
For modern purposes you really shouldn't be using telnet.
Not for actual communication, no. But as a quick and dirty means of
checking for a running server, and usually seeing the server's banner,
it's difficult to beat. I've also been known to test SMTP servers that
way.
Joe wrote:
randon <randon@nimbulus.xyz> wrote:
For modern purposes you really shouldn't be using telnet.
Not for actual communication, no. But as a quick and dirty means of checking for a running server, and usually seeing the server's
banner, it's difficult to beat. I've also been known to test SMTP
servers that way.
Though it's not unusual nowadays to find an SMTP server that gets
upset at the slow speed a human can turn around the commands ...
Joe <joe@jretrading.com> wrote:
Yes, possibly, though my server asks for an ident from connecting
SMTP servers. Nobody runs an ident server nowadays, so a timeout of
thirty seconds is imposed before the transaction continues.
What do you do if the ident server replies?
$ grep ^ident /etc/services
ident 113/tcp
identify 2987/tcp # identify
identify 2987/udp # identify
$ telnet localhost 113
Trying 127.0.0.1...
Connected to localhost.
Escape character is '^]'.
jddj
0 , 0 : ERROR : X-INVALID-REQUEST
Connection closed by foreign host.
$
I don't know how to speak the ident protocol, but it is running on
this machine. My recollection is you feed it an IP address and port
and it tells you the identity of the user who has opened the connection.
I know that the default Apache log entry has a field for identd
value, to be compatible with NCSA httpd, but I don't think anyone
enables the ident module these days.
Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:
Joe wrote:
randon <randon@nimbulus.xyz> wrote:
For modern purposes you really shouldn't be using telnet.
Not for actual communication, no. But as a quick and dirty means of
checking for a running server, and usually seeing the server's
banner, it's difficult to beat. I've also been known to test SMTP
servers that way.
Though it's not unusual nowadays to find an SMTP server that gets
upset at the slow speed a human can turn around the commands ...
Yes, possibly, though my server asks for an ident from connecting
SMTP servers. Nobody runs an ident server nowadays, so a timeout of
thirty seconds is imposed before the transaction continues.
Only spammers drop out in the timeout. As far as I'm aware, I've never
lost an email because a legitimate SMTP server will not wait for thirty seconds.
Eli the Bearded <*@eli.users.panix.com> writes:
I don't know how to speak the ident protocol, but it is running onhttps://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc1413
this machine. My recollection is you feed it an IP address and port
and it tells you the identity of the user who has opened the connection.
I know that the default Apache log entry has a field for identd
value, to be compatible with NCSA httpd, but I don't think anyone
enables the ident module these days.
Andy Burns wrote:
it's not unusual nowadays to find an SMTP server that gets
upset at the slow speed a human can turn around the commands ...
Yes, possibly, though my server asks for an ident from connecting
SMTP servers. Nobody runs an ident server nowadays, so a timeout of
thirty seconds is imposed before the transaction continues.
Only spammers drop out in the timeout. As far as I'm aware, I've never
lost an email because a legitimate SMTP server will not wait for thirty seconds.
In comp.sys.raspberry-pi, Joe <joe@jretrading.com> wrote:
Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:
Joe wrote:
randon <randon@nimbulus.xyz> wrote:
For modern purposes you really shouldn't be using telnet.
Not to telnetd servers probably, but it has other uses. And the post
you replied to did mention not needing a telnet daemon.
Not for actual communication, no. But as a quick and dirty means
of checking for a running server, and usually seeing the server's
banner, it's difficult to beat. I've also been known to test SMTP
servers that way.
And nntp, and web, and redis, and dictd, and ...
Though it's not unusual nowadays to find an SMTP server that gets
upset at the slow speed a human can turn around the commands ...
Can't say I've noticed that, but I don't do much raw SMTP. I've seen
that with NNTP.
Yes, possibly, though my server asks for an ident from connecting
SMTP servers. Nobody runs an ident server nowadays, so a timeout of
thirty seconds is imposed before the transaction continues.
What do you do if the ident server replies?
ident is one of the few protocols I tend to configure firewalls to send an >active reject, rather than a silent drop, but that was a habit developed 15+ >years ago, no idea how many ident requests get sent nowadays.
I've been fooling around with the Internet for over 30 years
(including using telnet to send test emails and talk to IRC servers),
but I've never even heard of this "ident" thing until it was brought
up here. I've never had to configure any hosts, firewalls, or
whatever with it in mind, and I've run my own mail server for over 20
years, so I suspect that if it ever really was a thing, by now it's
pretty much a non-issue.
In article <ita6veFapqeU1@mid.individual.net>,
Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:
ident is one of the few protocols I tend to configure firewalls to send an >> active reject, rather than a silent drop, but that was a habit developed 15+ >> years ago, no idea how many ident requests get sent nowadays.
I've been fooling around with the Internet for over 30 years (including
using telnet to send test emails and talk to IRC servers), but I've never even heard of this "ident" thing until it was brought up here. I've never had to configure any hosts, firewalls, or whatever with it in mind, and I've run my own mail server for over 20 years, so I suspect that if it ever
really was a thing, by now it's pretty much a non-issue.
(Someone else commented on my sig in another reply. The ASCII Apple has
been in it since 1989, though for the first four years it had "IIe" in the middle instead of "IIGS," because that's what I was using. The IIGS is no longer my daily driver, but I still have it and it lives on here. :-) )
_/_
/ v \ Scott Alfter (remove the obvious to send mail)
(IIGS( https://alfter.us/ Top-posting!
\_^_/ >What's the most annoying thing on Usenet?
Eli the Bearded <*@eli.users.panix.com> wrote:
What do you do if the ident server replies?Get on with the transaction immediately. I don't think I've ever
noticed this happening in the log file.
In article <ita6veFapqeU1@mid.individual.net>,
Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:
ident is one of the few protocols I tend to configure firewalls to send an >active reject, raththan a silent drop, but that was a habit developed 15+ >years ago, no idea how many ident reques
get sent nowadays.
I've been fooling around with the Internet for over 30 years (including using telnet to send test emails and talk to IRC servers), but I've never even heard of this "ident" thing until it was brought up here. I've never had to configure any hosts, firewalls, or whatever with it in mind, and I've run my own mail ser
for over 20 years, so I suspect that if it ever
really was a thing, by now it's pretty much a non-issue.
(Someone else commented on my sig in another reply. The ASCII Apple has been in it since 1989, though for the first four years it had "IIe" in the middle instead of
"IIGS," because that's what I was using. The IIGS is no longer my daily driver, but I still hav
it and it lives on here. :-) )
_/_
/ v \ Scott Alfter (remove the obvious to send mail)
(IIGS( https://alfter.us/ Top-posting!
\_^_/ >What's the most annoying thing on Usenet?
In comp.sys.raspberry-pi, Joe <joe@jretrading.com> wrote:
Eli the Bearded <*@eli.users.panix.com> wrote:
What do you do if the ident server replies?Get on with the transaction immediately. I don't think I've ever
noticed this happening in the log file.
So just that? No logging of the identity or adding it to mail headers somehow?
I just used `telnet mail.jretrading.com smtp` to send you
some mail from this host. I didn't notice any 30 second delays, but
there was a ~1 second pause after the RCPT command. Is that when the
ident kicks in?
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 468 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 34:42:16 |
| Calls: | 9,444 |
| Calls today: | 1 |
| Files: | 13,594 |
| Messages: | 6,111,252 |