🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1990Oct17.133028.14849@bnrgate.bnr.ca> pww@bnr.ca (Peter Whittaker) writes:
   In article <1990Oct16.225610.3505@oracle.com> tslee@oracle.uucp (Terry Lee) writes:
      However, it seems that everyone I ask about SLIP seems to speak
      ill of it... is SLIP all that bad?  Are there other relatively
      standard methods of running TCP without sizable investments in
      hardware?

Yes, SLIP was all that bad, at least by modern standards (as usual, it
was an inspired wonder in its time!).  It was a first cut, and as
noted, quick and dirty and hard to manage.  The second cut included
compressed headers and so then at least provided more reasonable
performance.  But most of the problems remained, and that's OK,
because they showed what needed to be done when serial line IP was
done Right, From Scratch again:

   Note:  the Internet community is apparently working on the PPP
   (Point-to-Point protocol) as a way of curing some SLIP headaches.
   Anyone know PPP's status?

PPP is standardized in RFC1171, with initial configuration options in
RFC1172.  A Sun implementation is available from
omnigate.clarkson.edu:pub/sun/ppp.tar.Z, and a KA9Q implementation
from ucdavis.ucdavis.edu:dist/ppp/*.  Others, of various ancestry and
heritage, are available from CMU (parent of the UCDavis KA9Q stuff, I
think) and Hawaii, though I can't point directly to them offhand.

(Brad Clements wrote that Sun stuff for the 386i.  Karl Fox
<karl@morningstar.com> ported it to SPARC under SunOS 4.0.3 and will
share his changes with folks who ask, via mail.  I don't know whether
it's been ported to SunOS 4.1 yet.)

Unless you have a dire need for backward compatibility, you shouldn't
be bothering with SLIP in this day and age, particularly not Classic
SLIP without header compression.  New installations should use PPP.