🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <59bu9q$7g1@elna.ethz.ch>,
	felix@nice.usergroup.ethz.ch (Felix Rauch) writes:

> I'm not sure what the 'i' protocol is, but isn't the 'j' protocol
> better anyway? With the 'j' protocol it doesn't matter how big your
> files are because there are not pauses between the files.

                              Taylor UUCP - UUCP Protocol Internals (p71 of 84)
UUCP `j' Protocol   
                    
   The `j' protocol is a variant of the `i' protocol. It was also written
   by Ian Lance Taylor, and first appeared in Taylor UUCP version 1.04.

   The `j' protocol is a version of the `i' protocol designed for
   communication links which intercept a few characters, such as XON or
   XOFF. It is not efficient to use it on a link which intercepts many
   characters, such as a seven bit link. The `j' protocol performs no
   error correction or detection; that is presumed to be the
   responsibility of the `i' protocol.

[ ... ]

   The header is followed by the number of data bytes given in data-high
   and data-low. These data bytes are the `i' protocol packet which is
   being wrapped in the `j' protocol packet. However, each character in
   the `i' protocol packet which the `j' protocol must avoid is
   transformed into a printable ASCII character (recall that avoiding a

So, I see no reason why use the `j' protocol on a 8 bit link, since
`j' == `i' + character escapes.