Subj : ipv6
To   : Benny Pedersen
From : Michiel van der Vlist
Date : Sun Jan 28 2018 12:17:22

Hello Benny,

On Friday January 26 2018 23:32, you wrote to Tommi Koivula:

 BP> please tell me my error now ?

I can connect now:

+ 12:16 [412] call to 2:230/38@fidonet
  12:16 [412] trying f38.n230.z2.binkp.net [62.66.148.112]...
  12:16 [412] connected
+ 12:16 [412] outgoing session with f38.n230.z2.binkp.net:24554 [62.66.148.112]
- 12:16 [412] OPT CRAM-MD5-04116e73d2c3c530b0f65382eb35c259
+ 12:16 [412] Remote requests MD mode
- 12:16 [412] SYS themultixpoint.junc.eu
- 12:16 [412] ZYZ Benny Pedersen

But no IPv6. :(

 BP> yep, my point is that protokol different ports is not needed to
 BP> support multi protocol streams, it will even work on modems, or have
 BP> users today never seen a modem ?

With modems there was no choice to suport multiple protocols like FTS-1, FTS-6 and EMSI over the same connection. With modem over POTS, the physical layer only supports ONE connection at the time. With IP this is different. The physical channel supports many connections at the same time. So while it may be theoretically possible to make software that supports more than one protocol on the same port, and I won't even rule out that some sofwtare actually does, I see no added value to such a complication. There is no shortage of ports, so why the complication of sharing ports? It makes it more difficult for others to connect.


Cheers, Michiel

--- GoldED+/W32-MSVC 1.1.5-b20170303
 * Origin: he.net certified sage (2:280/5555)

.