From: bhoward@is.morgan.com (Bruce Howard)
Date: Fri, 4 Jun 93 10:07:22 PDT
To: anton@hydra.unm.edu (Stanton McCandlish)
Subject: Re: Software infrastructure
In-Reply-To: <9306041032.AA14588@hydra.unm.edu>
Message-ID: <9306041706.AA14066@is1.is.morgan.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


> As for "is kermit good enough?"  No.  Almost NO ONE in the DOS world uses
> it any more, it is a total anachronism.  Of all the 400 or so users on my
> board, many from other parts of the country, even other countries, not
> ONE uses kermit (I have "What comm program do you use?" as one of the
> initial login questions).

programs come and go but protocols live forever.

i don't think you've looked around enough; in my own experience, kermit
has been available and in-use within every computing environment i've
operated or observed.  there are varying degrees of usage but its always
kept around, often because it seems to work in strange communications
conditions where other protocols fail.

>				...The only practical use of Kermit is for
> computer newbies to use it to access the dialup lines at their school
> (UNM gives out free copies of it), but most such people soon switch to
> another program. 
> ...
> Thing is Kermit is just plain old, and a pain in the butt.  When I
> started BBSing, the Kermit protocol was supported on most BBSs; today I
> cannot think of a single BBS around here that has it anymore (I'm the
> defacto city BBSlist maker, so I'd know :)

there are many places outside of the bbs world where people need to shuffle
files around and might desire encryption.  your opinions not withstanding,
i believe that kermit is more pervasive that you think.  if the purpose of
this exercise is to maximize the audience to which we make available easy
and useful encryption facilities, then kermit and things of its ilk need to
be supported.

				cheers,
				bruce