Readit News logoReadit News
Twisol commented on Reports of Telnet's death have been greatly exaggerated   terracenetworks.com/blog/... · Posted by u/ericpauley
shevy-java · a day ago
I first used telnet in the 1990s to connect and play a text-based MUD.

Back then we had large monitors with black background and green text font; for most people black background and white text was probably more common, but I remember having played that MUD for some weeks on such a setup (on a campus site, so these computers were used by students; we only had access to the campus on the weekend as the main guy's father in our group worked at that university).

It actually was fun to use telnet like that and play the MUD, even if inconvenient. Of course our group soon switched to MUD clients that were more convenient to use, so using telnet became super-rare. I only used telnet a few more times after that. About three times again playing lateron when I had no internet connection, and for a few other things too, unrelated to MUDs, e. g. testing websites and similar activities.

For connections, I kind of use ssh much more frequently so, even on windows via the tabby terminal. It is not as convenient on Linux (there I tend to prefer KDE konsole) but it works fairly well.

I have not used telnet in quite some years now, but I still remember fondly to having typed commands to search for herbs in a meadow on that MUD (well, room designated was meadows and you could find herbs which would replenish over time, so you could search, sell and so forth; I have not played any MUDs since decades but it was fun in the 1990s era).

Telnet will probably never die since it is so simple, but I think it is also not quite as important as it was, say, in the 1990s or so. Would be interesting for statistics that could measure this more objectively.

Twisol · a day ago
> room designated was meadows and you could find herbs which would replenish over time

I'm sure several MUDs did this, but, this sounds an awful lot like my home MUD of Achaea, which started in ~1997, still exists (healthily!), and has this exact system :)

Twisol commented on The Day the Telnet Died   labs.greynoise.io/grimoir... · Posted by u/pjf
1718627440 · 2 days ago
Using netcat results in showing Unicode replacement symbols, instead of answering to telnet options. I doubt it implements telnet at all, because this is just not its job.
Twisol · a day ago
I agree in principle, but actually, according to the netcat website [0]:

> If netcat is compiled with -DTELNET, the -t argument enables it to respond to telnet option negotiation [always in the negative, i.e. DONT or WONT]. This allows it to connect to a telnetd and get past the initial negotiation far enough to get a login prompt from the server. Since this feature has the potential to modify the data stream, it is not enabled by default. You have to understand why you might need this and turn on the #define yourself.

[0]: https://nc110.sourceforge.io/

Twisol commented on The Day the Telnet Died   labs.greynoise.io/grimoir... · Posted by u/pjf
RupertSalt · 2 days ago
Yes, perhaps we should define “MUD” and your incomplete experience of “most”.

As a MUD enthusiast for 37 years, I learned to program in C and Unix through TinyMUD, MUCK, and MUSH derived servers. From the beginning, none of these codebases implemted Telnet. There was nothing but a raw transparent TCP connection. In fact, I facilitated the introduction of a grand innovation: the "port concentrator" system which multiplexed TCP connections. Unix processes had a hard rlimit of 64 file descriptors, which crimped our style as an emerging MMORPG. The multiplexer increased this to 4096, for the biggest games of the era.

You mention MUSHclient, and I do not know about later revisions of the TinyMUSH server, but I can assure you that every MUSH I found from Larry Foard on, was not implementing Telnet. (I was privileged to help Larry "test" new features as I red-teamed his server with bizarre edge cases!)

Likewise, after I handed off TinyMUCK 2.3 to the furries, it was not doing the Telnet protocol. When we backported stuff to MUCK 1.x, it was not doing Telnet. I wrote a bonkers Perl program to read MUCK databases and sort of implement the game. No Telnet there. I've got to wonder whether the Ubermud or MOO guys had folded it in; they were close collaborators with us, back in the day.

Now as for the Diku, LP, and other “combat” type games, I’ve no idea. Perhaps they did. We never cared. I was aware that some of them had a pesky “prompt” that violated the line-mode assumptions of conventional clients and needed workarounds.

telnet(1), the program, was historically the only program that implemented the protocol. If you use Tinyfugue or Tinywar or tinymud.el, they are not, and no, I am not confused, because I was giving an example of why the Telnet-implementation, the program, the client, was so inadequate for playing on MUD servers.

It wouldn’t have been difficult to retrofit the Telnet RFC 854 into any MUD server, but none of us wizards had any use for it, seeing that our clients were mature and capable of much more processing without it.

If modern MUD servers have mostly implemented Telnet, then that is cool, but what surprises me is that it is mandatory, and your clients don’t seem to interoperate without it? That is a strange reversal!

Twisol · 2 days ago
> [...] no, I am not confused, because I was giving an example of why the Telnet-implementation, the program, the client, was so inadequate for playing on MUD servers.

Then this is at the heart of our disconnect, because the post of mine that you originally replied to --- as well as, unless I drastically misread, the original article under discussion --- was concerned with traffic on port 23, the Telnet protocol port, and not with any particular implementation communicating on that port. The concern of my original comment was that this might affect MUDs that operate on port 23. Perhaps you can understand my confusion when you reply stating categorically that most MUDs do not use "Telnet" (meaning the program), when that wasn't really what was at concern (and therefore implied that my question had no basis).

It is a true fact that many MUDs operate on port 23. Many do not, but you can skim a MUD aggregator like MudConnect [0] to see that it is quite common. Aardwolf, Discworld MUD, and the IRE games --- which consistently topped TopMudSites (when that aggregator was still running, anyway) all operate on 23, potentially in addition to an unreserved port.

> what surprises me is that it is mandatory, and your clients don’t seem to interoperate without it? That is a strange reversal!

All telopts are disabled by default, per Telnet RFC; the only things you must absolutely parse under the RFC are the standard complement of NVT commands (such as IAC GA "Go Ahead"), even if they are otherwise implemented as no-ops.

Any input stream with the high bit clear is treated as pure data -- with the incidental exception of bare `\r`, which must always be followed either by `\n` or by `\0`; but Postel's Law has turned that into more of a guideline. So as long as the standard NVT encoding is assumed (which is just 7-bit ASCII) and the NVT core escape sequences are avoided, a modern Telnet-based MUD client can interoperate with a plaintext MUD server without issue. (As you know, this is also why people get away with using `telnet` (the program) to access HTTP and SMTP services instead of using something like netcat.)

Some MUD clients will eagerly send IAC DO / IAC WILL subnegotiations, but general practice is to let the server offer first -- probably precisely to ensure compatibility with MUDs that don't implement Telnet subnegotiations.

> Now as for the Diku, LP, and other “combat” type games, I’ve no idea

Diku-family MUDs are certainly the ones I have the most experience with. I understand LP MUDs also generally have Telnet support; or at least, I recall seeing a patch for them that MUD owners often sought to apply to their games.

[0]: https://www.mudconnect.com/cgi-bin/search.cgi?mode=tmc_bigli...

Twisol commented on The Day the Telnet Died   labs.greynoise.io/grimoir... · Posted by u/pjf
RupertSalt · 2 days ago
Most MUDs do not use Telnet.

MUDs use plaintext TCP protocols that are accessible to a wide range of clients.

The Telnet protocol is well-defined and not completely plaintext. There are in-band signaling methods and negotiations. Telnet is defined to live on 23/tcp as an IANA well-known, privileged, reserved port.

MUDs do none of this. You can usually connect to a MUD using a Telnet client, but most players hate the experience and often deride this method in favor of a dedicated, programmable client.

The fact that MUDs inhabit higher 4-digit ports is an artifact from their beginnings as unprivileged, user-run servers without a standardized protocol or an assigned “well-known port” presence. If you want your MUD to be particularly inaccessible, you could certainly run on port 23 now!

Twisol · 2 days ago
As a MUD enthusiast of two decades, this is not accurate. Where are you getting this information?

Most MUDs implement RFC 854, and a number of non-standard Telnet option subnegotiation protocols have been adopted for compression (MCCP2), transmission of unrendered data (ATCP, GMCP, ZMP), and even a mechanism for enabling marking up the normal content using XML-style tags (MXP). These telopts build on the subnegotiation facility in standard Telnet, whose designers knew that the base protocol would be insufficient for many needs; there are a great number of IANA-controlled and standardized telopt codes that demonstrate this, and the MUD community has developed extensions using that same mechanism.

> You can usually connect to a MUD using a Telnet client, but most players hate the experience and often deride this method in favor of a dedicated, programmable client.

I think you are confusing "telnet" the program with "telnet" the protocol. I am speaking here of the protocol, defined at base in RFC 854, for which "telnet" the program is but one particularly common implementation. You look at any of those "dedicated, programmable clients" and they will contain an implementation of RFC 854, probably also an implementation of RFC 1143 (which nails down the rules of subnegotiation in order to prevent negotiation loops), and an implementation of the RFCs for several standard telopts as well as non-standardized MUD community telopts. I can speak for the behavior of MUSHclient in especial regard here, though I am also familiar with the underlying Telnet nature of Mudlet, ZMud, and CMUD, not to mention my very own custom-made prototype client for which I very much needed to implement Telnet as described above.

Twisol commented on The Day the Telnet Died   labs.greynoise.io/grimoir... · Posted by u/pjf
gerdesj · 2 days ago
telnet isn't just for ... telnet.

  $ telnet smtp.example.co.uk 25
  HELO me
  MAIL FROM: gerdesj@example2.co.uk
  RCPT TO: gerdesj@example.co.uk
  DATA
.. or you can use SWAKS! For some odd reason telnet is becoming rare as an installed binary.

Twisol · 2 days ago
The difference between "telnet" the program and "telnet" the protocol is especially important in this discussion, I think.

A more "proper" tool for that is netcat -- I doubt SMTP supports the Telnet option negotiations subsystem. (I also doubt SMTP servers can interpret the full suite of Network Virtual Terminal (NVT) commands that the Telnet protocol supports.) There's clearly enough similarity between the two protocols that if you're just using it to transfer plaintext it will probably work out fine, but they are distinct protocols.

Twisol commented on The Day the Telnet Died   labs.greynoise.io/grimoir... · Posted by u/pjf
Twisol · 2 days ago
> Someone upstream of a significant chunk of the internet’s transit infrastructure apparently decided telnet traffic isn’t worth carrying anymore. That’s probably the right call.

Does this impact traffic for MUDs at all? I know several MUDs operate on nonstandard Telnet ports, but many still allow connection on port 23. Does this block end-to-end Telnet traffic, or does it only block attempts to access Telnet services on the backbone relays themselves?

Twisol commented on See how many words you have written in Hacker News comments   serjaimelannister.github.... · Posted by u/Imustaskforhelp
ninalanyon · 10 days ago
Goodness me. I'm in the top 2.2% by word count.

I'm not at all sure what I feel about this. On the one hand it's fun to be near the top of some kind of ranking, on the other it suggests that I spend altogether too much time on HN.

Twisol · 10 days ago
Top 0.44% here. Hrm...
Twisol commented on Did a celebrated researcher obscure a baby's poisoning?   newyorker.com/magazine/20... · Posted by u/littlexsparkee
djeastm · 15 days ago
I'd just like to invoke Betteridge's Law of Headlines.

"Any headline that ends in a question mark can be answered by the word no."

It is based on the assumption that if the publishers were confident that the answer was yes, they would have presented it as an assertion; by presenting it as a question, they are not accountable for whether it is correct or not.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betteridge%27s_law_of_headline...

Twisol · 15 days ago
I'd just like to invoke the principle to "not judge a book by its cover".

The article here is very well written and does a great job of conveying the perspectives and opinions of many parties. I would recommend reading the article in spite of its headline.

Twisol commented on Did a celebrated researcher obscure a baby's poisoning?   newyorker.com/magazine/20... · Posted by u/littlexsparkee
steelbrain · 15 days ago
> Does no one care that this is potentially a murder case?

Did we read the same article? Why are you so quick to jump the gun here?

> Koren obtained a sample of Rani’s breast milk, which she had kept in her freezer. His lab measured its morphine concentration at eighty-seven nanograms per millilitre.

If this is in the breastmilk, it will end up in the stomach, and it may end up in gastric contents. I don't understand this urge to demonize the parents, who on top of having lost a child, have to stand these witchtrials.

Twisol · 15 days ago
> I don't understand this urge to demonize the parents, who on top of having lost a child, have to stand these witchtrials.

Neither the article nor the commenter you replied to has demonized the parents. Yes, both the evidence discussed in the article and the opinions of those interviewed indicate direct administration of a pharmaceutical; it is appropriate to discuss this. Nobody has pointed the finger at anyone; it would indeed be quite inappropriate for such a discussion to be held in this forum.

Twisol commented on Did a celebrated researcher obscure a baby's poisoning?   newyorker.com/magazine/20... · Posted by u/littlexsparkee
pickleRick243 · 15 days ago
Are you Koren? Did we read the same article? The one that calls into question anything Koren says or claims?

From the article I read:

"A twelve-day-old infant cannot crawl. It cannot grab, and it cannot put something into its own mouth. “It also cannot swallow a Tylenol-3 pill,” Juurlink told me. “I don’t know what happened in that house, on that night, but I do know that someone gave this baby crushed Tylenol-3,” likely mixed in breast milk or formula. “That’s the only way these numbers make sense.”"

Twisol · 15 days ago
Also relevant to the quote selected by 'steelbrain:

> Recently, Parvaz Madadi has undergone a painful process of revisiting her past work and memories. [...] She added that she had no confidence in the measurement of Rani’s breast-milk sample, because it had been handled by Koren’s lab.

There is a lot to process in this long article. The quote selected by 'steelbrain, concerning Koren's measurement occurs very, very early on, and much of the rest of the article is about contrasting Koren's early presentations of the material against others' testimony. It's worth reading the whole thing

To 'steelbrain: cherry-picking one single quote out of a nuanced article does the journalism here a dire disservice. It's okay for different people to have different beliefs and takeaways from the article. However, your own defense of the biological mechanism here is directly argued against in the "same article" you are admonishing others over reading. That is not conducive to a discussion in good faith.

u/Twisol

KarmaCake day3343July 20, 2010
About
Software developer and mathematician; areas of interest include programming language semantics and concurrency. I <3 Rust.

Currently a graduate student at UC Santa Cruz; previously worked at Caltech's Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) on mission planning+simulation software.

Blog: https://www.jonathan.com/

Twitter: https://twitter.com/Twisol

GitHub: https://github.com/Twisol

Email: twisolar <at> gmail (please don't come selling any services; otherwise, please let me know you found me via HN or something, because cold calls are confusing enough)

[ my public key: https://keybase.io/twisol; my proof: https://keybase.io/twisol/sigs/t3hJmOxbrWLW5PpKNS3nbtl1bOYx5bSTwF75FHAW6Hw ]

View Original