To: email@example.com Cc: firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com In-Reply-To: "John C. Daub"'s message of Wed, 10 Apr 1996 12:35:02 -0700 <Pine.SOL.3.92.960410143008.2603Afirstname.lastname@example.org> Subject: Re: request for a new URL scheme From: Larry Masinter <email@example.com> Message-Id: <96Apr10.firstname.lastname@example.org> Date: Wed, 10 Apr 1996 18:54:33 PDT > I would rather see browers that allowed telnet-style helper apps to > be specified on a per-port basis. Now that I understand what this means, I don't think it is very useful, but it's also easy to do. Not useful: Lately, I've had to telnet to hosts that use random port numbers to avoid the "ping every port 23 in the word and then try to log in" hackers. Apparently this is a common approach for bastion hosts and does seem to slow down the site crackers. But I've also seen muds that run mud service on one port, HTTP on another, POP3 on another, NTTP on another, and they're all in the >256 range. Since port number selection is random, something that selects one kind of app for port 8000 and another for port 8888 doesn't seem to be very useful (to me.) Easy: Write a program called 'metatelnet' and have it call 'telnet' for one port range, 'mudclient' for another, etc. I mean, you can just have your generic telnet launch other apps.