Date: Tue, 11 Mar 1997 12:57:28 +0800 (WST) From: Adrian Chadd <adrian@obiwan.aceonline.com.au> To: RGireyev@bellind.com Cc: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: RE: Win95 Networking Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.95q.970311125249.7942A-100000@obiwan.aceonline.com.au> In-Reply-To: <c=US%a=_%p=BellInd%l=CDCEXCHANGE-970310195045Z-6095@cdcexchange.bellind.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 10 Mar 1997 RGireyev@bellind.com wrote: > I have a stupid question. If SLIP/CSLIP is faster than PPP but > only supports TCP/IP while PPP supports the whole world > why configure PPP to access the internet which is strictly TCP/IP? > Wouldn't SLIP/CSLIP be better? > I'm very ignorant so be gentle. > > >Of course, all of this is explained in the man page for ppp... Basically :) Aside from other nice things, ppp can do stuff like PAP and CHAP authentication, link statistics negotiation (eg mru / mtu), IP address negotiation, etc, etc. Basically this is vs. SLIP where you *NEED* to have something to interpret what the server has dumped you as your IP. IE this is what we have: intellect:~$ slip (blah) My IP is 203.19.29.3 <-- server IP Your IP is 203.19.29.253 <-- your IP And the script has to interpret this and set up the SLIP interface with the right parameters. So PPP is much nicer from the point of "normal" users running Windows 95 or something like that, they just put in their name / password, specify PPP in dialup adaptor and the server authenticates them, negotiates all the link information and brings the link up all by itself. But (*grin*) for permanent connections or connections between boxes via serial I still like to use SLIP. But this is for connections I *KNOW* the IPs of and that won't change all that much. Have fun, Adrian.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.3.95q.970311125249.7942A-100000>