- From: Paul Hoffman <ietf-lists@proper.com>
- Date: Sun, 19 Feb 1995 17:19:48 -0700
- To: miked@ncd.com (Michael A. Dolan)
- Cc: uri@bunyip.com
>Seems unnecessarily restrictive - local host fingerd, and ( to a lesser >extent) standard ports only. I'm not sure what you mean by "local host fingerd". Yes, it is restrictive to the port number: so is RFC 1288. Like Reed, I haven't ever come across a finger daemon running on a different port. For that matter, I've never come across a finger client that allows you to specify a port, either. As I have recently learned, there is no reason to solve problems that don't yet exist. On the other hand, if you have seen examples of finger running on ports other than 79, and you feel that such systems warrant a change in the URL, please let me know. --Paul Hoffman --Proper Publishing
Received on Sunday, 19 February 1995 20:19:25 UTC