[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: More BCP: revenge of RS232 and CLIs

To: "Christopher L. Morrow" <chris@UU.NET>
Subject: RE: More BCP: revenge of RS232 and CLIs
From: Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2003 21:40:34 -0700
Cc: opsec@ops.ietf.org
References: <2D00AD0E4D36D411BD300008C786E4240D5595D1@Denntex021.qwest.net> <Pine.LNX.4.53.0310221750530.12105@mall.pulltheplug.com> <Pine.GSO.4.58.0310222208020.11275@rampart.argfrp.us.uu.net>

> Why not specify ATLEAST 9600/8/n/1 ?

is 1200 baud less secure?

randy

Follow-Ups:
- RE: More BCP: revenge of RS232 and CLIs
  - From: George Jones <gmj@pobox.com>
- RE: More BCP: revenge of RS232 and CLIs
  - From: "Christopher L. Morrow" <chris@UU.NET>

References:
- RE: More BCP: revenge of RS232 and CLIs
  - From: "Smith, Donald" <Donald.Smith@qwest.com>
- RE: More BCP: revenge of RS232 and CLIs
  - From: George Jones <gmj@pobox.com>
- RE: More BCP: revenge of RS232 and CLIs
  - From: "Christopher L. Morrow" <chris@UU.NET>

Prev by Date: Re: [spam score 5/10 -pobox] draft-jones-opsec-01.txt comments
Next by Date: RE: More BCP: revenge of RS232 and CLIs
Previous by thread: RE: More BCP: revenge of RS232 and CLIs
Next by thread: RE: More BCP: revenge of RS232 and CLIs
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread