[email protected] wrote:
> [-- text/plain, size 0.9K, charset utf-8, 28 lines, encoding quoted-printable
> --]
>
> On Wed, Jul 08, 2026 at 12:05:52PM +0200, Christian Groessler wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On 7/8/26 2:24 AM, Andy Smith wrote:
> > > On Wed, Jul 08, 2026 at 12:36:36AM +0200, Christian Groessler wrote:
> > > > In "trusted local networks" one could use telnet and forget about ssh
> > > > overhead...
> > >
> > > I don't really follow the logic. telnet is not designed for file
> > > transfer but for interactive login.
> >
> >
> > I wasn't aware that it's about file transfer. (ftp to the rescue? :-))
>
> The older among us know to use sz/rz for that (still in the package
> lrzsz). Designed to transfer binary files over channels requiring an
> escape layer (plus some error correction on top).
>
> But yes, nowadays I'd consider telnet mostly dead. The last legit
> application for a long time, using the client to interact with clear
> text protocol servers (http, smtp, you name them) is pretty well
> served by "socat -", which uses readline to edit each line before
> sending it.
>
I occasionally use telnet to test if a port has a server listening on
it. I know I could use nmap (or other things) but the telnet syntax
is burnt into my brain and is very simple:-
telnet <server> <port number>
Some server daemons even tell you who they are:-
chris$ telnet q957 22
Trying 192.168.1.5...
Connected to q957.
Escape character is '^]'.
SSH-2.0-OpenSSH_10.0p2 Debian-7+deb13u4
--
Chris Green
ยท
