NETWORK WORKING GROUP NIC 5740
Request for Comments #97 John T. Melvin
Richard W. Watson
SRI-ARC
15 February 1971
A FIRST CUT AT A PROPOSED TELNET PROTOCOL
1 Introduction
This paper describes a first cut at a proposed Telnet protocol.
2 Some Design Problems
2A. Basic Assumption
Melvin & Watson [Page 1]
RFC 97 Proposed Telnet Protocol February 1971
ii) The user should be able to escape back to his local system or escape from the server process to the server system.
Melvin & Watson [Page 2]
RFC 97 Proposed Telnet Protocol February 1971
ConVentions to solve the above problems are most simply
3 Proposed Telnet Conventions
3A The server site is to assume initially that echoing is performed by a user site process until explict1y commanded otherwise. If the user site can send character-at-a-time, then after connection and login have been established, tne user could switch Lo server-site- echo by command to the server site and then command (invisible to the server site) his local Telnet to change its echo mode also.
Melvin & Watson [Page 3]
RFC 97 Proposed Telnet Protocol February 1971
3C We recommend that network standards be established for the meaning of local echoes of HT, VT, and FF or a convention to be established for sending the meaning of these characters to the server process. The NLS(NIC), for example, needs to keep track of the position of the print head and in the absence of such conventions will convert these character codes to spaces and line feeds. This means that the appearance of the page on output may differ from the appearance on input. It would be helpful to the user if his page on output could be formatted as it appeared on input.
Melvin & Watson [Page 4]
RFC 97 Proposed Telnet Protocol February 1971
For an initial Telnet protocol this is probably not necessary.
Melvin & Watson [Page 5]
RFC 97 Proposed Telnet Protocol February 1971
3G We now come back to the problem of interrupting or escaping in the remote server system. In systems which do not lock out the input keyboard when output is going on, the mechanisms and conventions outlined above would seem adequate unless a special break signal is the escape signal. This latter case requires more study. In systems which allow no input while output is occurring, one may have to live with the consequences of such a terminal discipline and be prepared to wait until output stops before an escape code can be sent. If the keyboard is locked and an escape break signal can be sent to the user's system, it can prevent output from going to the terminal, but must be prepared to continue receiving it from the server site until the user can inform his Telnet process to send an interrupt or escape signal to the server site. Again this is a problem for further study.
Melvin & Watson [Page 6]
RFC 97 Proposed Telnet Protocol February 1971
APPENDIX A
Melvin & Watson [Page 7]
RFC 97 Proposed Telnet Protocol February 1971
user site <- NIC
Melvin & Watson [Page 8]
RFC 97 Proposed Telnet Protocol February 1971
4 NLS(NIC) Character Conventions of Interest to Telnet
Melvin & Watson [Page 9]
RFC 97 Proposed Telnet Protocol February 1971
presently ASCII code '37
+----+ |
| | Server |
| | Program |
| | |
+----+ |
^ | |
| v |
+----+ Terminal |
| | control |
| | software | SERVER
| | and | SITE
+----+ possibly |
^ | hardware |
| v |
Melvin & Watson [Page 10]
RFC 97 Proposed Telnet Protocol February 1971
+----+ |
| | |
| | NCP |
| | |
+----+ |
^ | |
| v |
. . . . Figure 1 - . . . . Telnet Connection
| v
+----+ |
| | |
| | NCP |
| | |
+----+ |
^ | |
| v |
+----+ |
| | |
| | Telnet |
| | |
+----+ |
^ | | USER
| v | SITE
+----+ Terminal |
| | control |
| | hardware- |
| | software |
+----+ |
^ | |
| v |
+----+ |
| | User |
\ | terminal |
\--+ |
[ This RFC was put into machine readable form for entry ] [ into the online RFC archives by Tony Hansen 08/08 ]