Re: false portscan alarm
- From: ibuprofin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Moe Trin)
- Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2006 15:02:18 -0500
On Fri, 20 Oct 2006, in the Usenet newsgroup comp.security.firewalls, in article
<45381815.820501561@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "GEO" Me@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
(Moe Trin) wrote:
What _are_ you using instead, Trumpet Winsock?
Trumpet Winsock version 2.0 revision B. It looked as if version 3
might stop working after 30 days, so I kept version 2.0.
Oh, my! How old is _that_ stuff?
Since Windows 3.1 did not try so hard to be everything to everybody
it did not include so many programs, and I guess it was designed with
a single, isolated, user in mind.
It certainly was single user, and as I recall, it was also single tasking.
You could have several applications open (I think) but I'm pretty sure only
one was actually running at a time. I vaguely remember that it was only
six or seven high density floppies - call it 8 Megs max.
Terminal? There is a very nice program called Procomm Plus version
2.1 for Windows 3.1. I know there is a version for Windows 95, and I
believe it even had a DOS version.
PRCM243.ARC 03-17-89 PROCOMM VER 2.4.3, ADDS YMODEM G PROTOCOL 142848
That's off a BBS directory listing. Version 2.4.2 was being used in the
fall of 1987, but wasn't available when this listing was made. I'm sure
that _somewhere_ in the garage, there is a box with a manual and the single
floppy it came on. Procomm was one of the standards of the era.
Old guy
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: false portscan alarm
- From: GEO
- Re: false portscan alarm
- References:
- false portscan alarm
- From: mikahan
- Re: false portscan alarm
- From: Bit Twister
- Re: false portscan alarm
- From: Spack
- Re: false portscan alarm
- From: GEO
- Re: false portscan alarm
- From: Spack
- Re: false portscan alarm
- From: GEO
- Re: false portscan alarm
- From: Moe Trin
- Re: false portscan alarm
- From: GEO
- false portscan alarm
- Prev by Date: Re: Unable to access Checkpoint's policy editor with Nokia IP
- Next by Date: IM and P2P
- Previous by thread: Re: false portscan alarm
- Next by thread: Re: false portscan alarm
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|