On Wednesday 19 September 2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I just need the client's IP address, so no dns needed. I don't see how
> the shell can determine it, because the stdin/out/err fd's are
> "attached" to the pty. You can't use getpeername() because the peer is
> telnetd!
i meant it's up to
I just need the client's IP address, so no dns needed. I don't see how
the shell can determine it, because the stdin/out/err fd's are
"attached" to the pty. You can't use getpeername() because the peer is
telnetd!
I have a small patch that works for me on my BB v1.0 code.
Unfortunately, I'm not in
On Monday 17 September 2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I went looking for "REMOTEHOST" because that's what I'm used to
> getting on various Linux systems I use.
*shrug* i dont think there's any telnet standard we could refer to here
> Obviously REMOTE_ADDR would be fine, but I don't see it, eith
I went looking for "REMOTEHOST" because that's what I'm used to
getting on various Linux systems I use. Obviously REMOTE_ADDR would be
fine, but I don't see it, either.
In fact, maybe I'm missing something but I don't see where telnetd is
setting any environment variables.
Could this be done in so
On Wednesday 22 August 2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> My application wants/needs to know the address of the host that's
> connected via telnet, but the REMOTEHOST variable doesn't seem to be
> provided.
what's wrong with REMOTE_ADDR ?
-mike
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed
My application wants/needs to know the address of the host that's
connected via telnet, but the REMOTEHOST variable doesn't seem to be
provided. Was this an active decision? Oversight? On the TODO list?
I've written a patch that works for my situation. Is this something
the group might be interest
