Service to turn web into telnet?
m a n @netcom.com Dallman Ross
the IS department :-) -- I have not yet persuaded my sysadmin that
telnet out of the facility should be allowed. (That would be so I can
get to, _inter alia_, my Netcom shell account.)
I have www, and that's it. Actually, the sysadmin claims that I should
be able to pop3 mail from elsewhere. I'm unclear on how I could be able
to do that and not telnet. Isn't pop3 equivalent to telnetting to port
110 (on most mail hosts)? I haven't tried yet, because I'm still
reconfiguring my computer and had to leave work today before I got that
far. :-)
Suggestions? Anybody know of a www site that permits telnet out?
Oh, here's a weird one, related tangentially: I plugged in my new PCMCIA
10-base-T network card and fired up my laptop. I did not add any IP,
DHCP, dns, etc., settings to the TCP/IP configuration for the network
card. (We use static addressing at work, but I had left the settings
untouched at this point, which meant DHCP was turned on.) This is in
Windows 98, I should add. So, what happens? I end up with an IP
address in the range 169.254.xxx.xx. I looked it up: "Linklocal," "For
use with Link Local Networks, Information Sciences Institute,
*University of Southern California." HUH??!! I am in Germany!
WTFIGO?! (My domain falls under 138.50.xxx.xxx.)
--
__ ___ dm...@netcom.com
(/ \ _ /) /) _ _ _ _ _ (/__) _ _ _ Dante Strasse 53
/` )(_(_( _(__/|/|/(_(_(_/| ( / ( (_)_/_)_/_)_ 69115 Heidelberg
(___/ ` ( \ Germany
Henry Yen
Dallman Ross <d m a n @ n e t c o m . c o m> wrote:
>I have www, and that's it. Actually, the sysadmin claims that I should
>be able to pop3 mail from elsewhere. I'm unclear on how I could be able
>to do that and not telnet. Isn't pop3 equivalent to telnetting to port
>110 (on most mail hosts)? I haven't tried yet, because I'm still
yes, mostly. when you speak of "telnet" in the sense of remote login,
then this really means "telnetting" to port 23.
>Suggestions? Anybody know of a www site that permits telnet out?
that's probably about as likely as finding a truly "open"
news posting site..
if your firewall is a basic one, you might be able to get around it,
but you'll need cooperation from some outside server anyway. and if
your firewall is any other than the most simplistic, you'll be SOL
as most of these are intelligent and "watch" the data as it passes
back and forth (it may "know" what POP3 transactions look like,
regardless of what port you're trying to fake it out with).
>Oh, here's a weird one, related tangentially: I plugged in my new PCMCIA
>10-base-T network card and fired up my laptop. I did not add any IP,
>DHCP, dns, etc., settings to the TCP/IP configuration for the network
>card. (We use static addressing at work, but I had left the settings
>untouched at this point, which meant DHCP was turned on.) This is in
>Windows 98, I should add. So, what happens? I end up with an IP
>address in the range 169.254.xxx.xx. I looked it up: "Linklocal," "For
>use with Link Local Networks, Information Sciences Institute,
>*University of Southern California." HUH??!! I am in Germany!
>WTFIGO?! (My domain falls under 138.50.xxx.xxx.)
bill gates strikes again! (when in doubt, make up something out of the
blue and call it a "standard"; the sheer volume of windows sites will
force the "standard" to become a "standard".) RFC1918 lists some
networks that are considered private, and this one aint one of 'em.
however, a quick search on dejanews reveals this beauty:
==================================================
IPAC_OFF.INF - DISABLE TCP/IP IP AUTOCONFIGURATION
==================================================
The Windows 98 TCP/IP stack supports a new mechanism for automatic
address assignment of IP addresses for simple LAN-based network
configurations. IP Autoconfiguration Addressing is an extension of
dynamic IP address assignment for LAN adapters. It enables
configuration of IP addresses without using static IP address
assignment or installing a Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol
DHCP) server.
If a network LAN adapter is configured for TCP/IP, and if "Obtain
an IP address automatically" is selected on the IP Address tab in
the TCP/IP Properties dialog box, Windows 98 TCP/IP attempts to find
and use a DHCP service on the attached network to obtain a
dynamically assigned IP address. If it does not find a DHCP service,
Windows 98 uses IP Autoconfiguration Addressing by assigning the
adapter an Class B IP address out of the network number 169.254.x.x
IP address space.
^^^^^^^^
by the way ISI.EDU is one of the sacred keepers of the internet flame.
among other things, they run IANA (internet assigned numbers authority),
i believe (the source of all things numerical and internet). so --
perhaps billy "bought" this class B range from iana and called it
his own private "Link Local" network.
--
Henry Yen
Hicksville, NY (yes, there really is a "Hicksville"...)
Shawn
: the IS department :-) -- I have not yet persuaded my sysadmin that
: telnet out of the facility should be allowed. (That would be so I can
: get to, _inter alia_, my Netcom shell account.)
Don't use a telnet proxy, use the firewall itself. All firewalls
come with a telnet gateway, so that you can telnet to the gateway
from within the LAN, then telnet OUT from the gateway to the rest of
the 'net.
: I have www, and that's it. Actually, the sysadmin claims that I should
: be able to pop3 mail from elsewhere. I'm unclear on how I could be able
: to do that and not telnet. Isn't pop3 equivalent to telnetting to port
: 110 (on most mail hosts)? I haven't tried yet, because I'm still
: reconfiguring my computer and had to leave work today before I got that
: far. :-)
It's not exactly a telnet session, but a telnet session will work for
checking POP3 mail. You'd have to set up the firewall to allow
traffic over the 110 port.
: Suggestions? Anybody know of a www site that permits telnet out?
It can be done, but I don't know of any sites that have a WWW->Telnet
gateway. To see it done, check out
http://coulomb.mechanik.th-darmstadt.de/user/Telnet/
Alternatively, you could set up an EMail account over at one of the
free WWW accessible Email companies, such as
Which allows you to not only POP3 your mail, but to read & enter it
directly over the web page. Then set up a .forward here on Netcom to
forward your mail to your email box on that service. I've had a
NetAddress account for a couple of years, and it works well. It's
free, so long as you can put up with a few ad banners.
Shawn
--
Eye yam aye tru beeleever inn hour edukashun sistum.
Tom Lane
> Well, I have a new job, and -- even though I'm ostensibly supervising
> the IS department :-) -- I have not yet persuaded my sysadmin that
> telnet out of the facility should be allowed. (That would be so I can
> get to, _inter alia_, my Netcom shell account.)
Um, does your location actually have router-level blocks against
traffic to an outside port 23? (And if so, for heaven's sake why?)
My guess is that all you need to do is install a telnet client
application and you're set. Your sysadmin probably either doesn't
want to be bothered to do/support that, or doesn't understand the
difference between blocking traffic to *external* ports 23 and
*internal* ports 23. Neither is an excuse that will pass scrutiny
(especially not if he reports to you rather than vice versa).
regards, tom lane
m a n @netcom.com Dallman Ross
> Dallman Ross <d m a n @ n e t c o m . c o m> wrote:
> >I have www, and that's it. Actually, the sysadmin claims that I
> >should be able to pop3 mail from elsewhere. I'm unclear on how I
> >could be able to do that and not telnet. Isn't pop3 equivalent to
> >telnetting to port 110 (on most mail hosts)? I haven't tried yet,
> >because I'm still
> yes, mostly. when you speak of "telnet" in the sense of remote login,
> then this really means "telnetting" to port 23.
Exactly! That's what I figured, and what I tried to tell him last
night.
> >Suggestions? Anybody know of a www site that permits telnet out?
> that's probably about as likely as finding a truly "open"
> news posting site..
I was afraid of that.
> if your firewall is a basic one, you might be able to get around it,
> but you'll need cooperation from some outside server anyway. and if
> your firewall is any other than the most simplistic, you'll be SOL as
> most of these are intelligent and "watch" the data as it passes back
> and forth (it may "know" what POP3 transactions look like, regardless
> of what port you're trying to fake it out with).
What sort of "cooperation"? It's probably simplistic. I could always
email the guy who used to run IS. :-) He set it up. He's not liked
there, but he and I had met previously and gotten along. :-)
Re. the data trails, I think the sysadmin is too green to notice,
at least for the time being. And by the time he does, I will have
established my autocracy firmly in place. :-) No, really, he's quite
enthusiastic and helpful, and I would NOT say "incompetent"; just, well,
inexperienced and OJT-educated.
Truly fascinating, captain! Thanks so much for digging that one up.
> by the way ISI.EDU is one of the sacred keepers of the internet flame.
> among other things, they run IANA (internet assigned numbers authority),
> i believe (the source of all things numerical and internet). so --
> perhaps billy "bought" this class B range from iana and called it
> his own private "Link Local" network.
:-) At first I wondered if someone at USC was totally hacking into our
network!
--
\ .-. .-. .-. .-. .-. .-. .-. /
\-d-/-m-\-a-/-n-\-@-/-n-\-e-/-t-\-c-/-o-\-m-/-.-\-c-/-o-\-m-/
'-' '-' '-' '-' '-' '-' '-' '-'
m a n @netcom.com Dallman Ross
> Dallman Ross <d m a n @ n e t c o m . c o m> wrote:
> : supervising the IS department :-) -- I have not yet persuaded my
> : sysadmin that telnet out of the facility should be allowed. (That
> : would be so I can get to, _inter alia_, my Netcom shell account.)
> Don't use a telnet proxy, use the firewall itself. All firewalls
> come with a telnet gateway, so that you can telnet to the gateway
> from within the LAN, then telnet OUT from the gateway to the rest of
> the 'net.
Hmm. You mean log in to the gateway?
> : I have www, and that's it. Actually, the sysadmin claims that I
> : should be able to pop3 mail from elsewhere. I'm unclear on how I
> : could be able to do that and not telnet. Isn't pop3 equivalent to
> : telnetting to port 110 (on most mail hosts)? I haven't tried yet,
> : because I'm still reconfiguring my computer and had to leave work
> : today before I got that far. :-)
> It's not exactly a telnet session, but a telnet session will work for
> checking POP3 mail. You'd have to set up the firewall to allow
> traffic over the 110 port.
Yeah, I have had CRT configured with several "telnet port 110" profiles
for a long time, and use it when I don't want to log in to various
accounts traditionally and don't want to fire up Outlook 98 (I like it,
actually, but the overhead to that thing is always a consideration when
I just want a quick check of one of my accounts).
So I wonder if the firewall was set up that way by the predecessor.
> : Suggestions? Anybody know of a www site that permits telnet out?
> It can be done, but I don't know of any sites that have a WWW->Telnet
> gateway. To see it done, check out
> http://coulomb.mechanik.th-darmstadt.de/user/Telnet/
I will! Thanks.
> Alternatively, you could set up an EMail account over at one of the
> free WWW accessible Email companies, such as
> Which allows you to not only POP3 your mail, but to read & enter it
> directly over the web page. Then set up a .forward here on Netcom to
> forward your mail to your email box on that service. I've had a
> NetAddress account for a couple of years, and it works well. It's
> free, so long as you can put up with a few ad banners.
Yeah, I thought about that, but - what a workaround. I could just as
easily forward mail to my work account! But I'd rather not mix work and
pleasure as blatantly as that. Keep it compartmentalized. But maybe
that's what you meant. Yeah, that could work. (I also use the various
addresses for natural "filtering" of what I read when.)
m a n @netcom.com Dallman Ross
> Dallman Ross <d m a n @ n e t c o m . c o m> writes:
> > Well, I have a new job, and -- even though I'm ostensibly
> > supervising the IS department :-) -- I have not yet persuaded my
> > sysadmin that telnet out of the facility should be allowed. (That
> > would be so I can get to, _inter alia_, my Netcom shell account.)
> Um, does your location actually have router-level blocks against
> traffic to an outside port 23? (And if so, for heaven's sake why?)
Yes, that does seem to be the case. Why? I don't know, paranoia?
Nobody ever had a need before? (Nobody in the organization even knows
what "scandisk" is, let alone how to telnet, except for the sysadmin and
his lackey, and, now, me.) Our domain is a "gift" that piggybacks off
of a military block. That likely has something to do with it as well --
at least in the psychology of those who set it up.
> My guess is that all you need to do is install a telnet client
> application and you're set. Your sysadmin probably either doesn't
You mean as in CRT? I will know that for sure in a couple of hours, but
I don't think so. Or maybe you mean install one on the server? Yeah,
that seems to be what you must mean. Okay. Doesn't SCO UNIX come with
that turned on? Or are you saying that it was purposely turned off
earlier?
Oh, we also have a serious Y2K problem that I will have to help find
workarounds for. I haven't started looking at that yet. Anybody with
suggestions there, as long as I'm brain-picking?
> want to be bothered to do/support that, or doesn't understand the
> difference between blocking traffic to *external* ports 23 and
> *internal* ports 23. Neither is an excuse that will pass scrutiny
> (especially not if he reports to you rather than vice versa).
Yup.
Greg Andrews
>
>be able to pop3 mail from elsewhere. I'm unclear on how I could be able
>to do that and not telnet. Isn't pop3 equivalent to telnetting to port
>110 (on most mail hosts)?
>
For the most part. They're both TCP connections, though the telnet
connection runs a different protocol on top of the TCP transport.
However, a TCP connection to port 110 (pop3) and a TCP connection
to port 23 (telnet) can be completely different things as far as
the firewall's packet filters are concerned. The firewall can
allow connections to port 110 on the other host while still blocking
connections to port 23. POP3 is allowed while telnet is blocked.
>
>Suggestions? Anybody know of a www site that permits telnet out?
>
Bypassing your site's security is not going to win you brownie points.
I would ask nicely if they would be willing to allow telnet connections
from your IP address to a single Netcom IP address (or perhaps two).
And if the answer is "No", live with it.
>
>Oh, here's a weird one, related tangentially: I plugged in my new PCMCIA
>10-base-T network card and fired up my laptop. I did not add any IP,
>DHCP, dns, etc., settings to the TCP/IP configuration for the network
>card. (We use static addressing at work, but I had left the settings
>untouched at this point, which meant DHCP was turned on.) This is in
>Windows 98, I should add. So, what happens? I end up with an IP
>address in the range 169.254.xxx.xx. I looked it up: "Linklocal," "For
>use with Link Local Networks, Information Sciences Institute,
>*University of Southern California." HUH??!! I am in Germany!
>WTFIGO?! (My domain falls under 138.50.xxx.xxx.)
>
That's just Uncle Bill pretending he knows how to play on the Internet.
Lose9? does that kind of thing. Boot with DHCP selected, but there's
no answer from a DHCP server? Pick an IP address at random and use it.
Never mind that the RFC says we should do something else. We're Microsoft.
-Greg
--
::::::::::::::::::: Greg Andrews ge...@netcom.com :::::::::::::::::::
Conway's Law: In any organization there will always be
one person who knows what is going on.
This person must be fired.
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Tom Lane
>> application and you're set.
> You mean as in CRT? I will know that for sure in a couple of hours, but
> I don't think so. Or maybe you mean install one on the server? Yeah,
> that seems to be what you must mean. Okay. Doesn't SCO UNIX come with
> that turned on?
Oh, I was blithely assuming that you wanted to do this from Windoze
(possibly because you crossposted into netcom.software.ibm-pc).
Last I heard, Windows doesn't come with a telnet client already
installed. On Unix "telnet" is the standard telnet client.
But apparently you already know the source of the problem: your
routers are configured not to allow connections to an outside port 23.
I can see that they might have been configured that way for reasons
of paranoia, if the admin thought that no one would use telnet anyway.
But (notwithstanding gerg's comment) I see no reason not to remove the
block if you have a need to use it.
Unblocking *inbound* port 23 connections would be quite a different
story ... but AFAIK every router that has packet filtering capability
distinguishes between outgoing and incoming traffic.
regards, tom lane
Rick Snover
>Dallman Ross <d m a n @ n e t c o m . c o m> writes:
>> Tom Lane <t...@netcom.com> spake thusly:
>>> My guess is that all you need to do is install a telnet client
>>> application and you're set.
>
>> You mean as in CRT? I will know that for sure in a couple of hours, but
>> I don't think so. Or maybe you mean install one on the server? Yeah,
>> that seems to be what you must mean. Okay. Doesn't SCO UNIX come with
>> that turned on?
>
>Oh, I was blithely assuming that you wanted to do this from Windoze
>(possibly because you crossposted into netcom.software.ibm-pc).
>Last I heard, Windows doesn't come with a telnet client already
>installed. On Unix "telnet" is the standard telnet client.
FWIW: Windows has had built-in telnet clients since Win95: Select
Start|Run and type telnet. FTP, too. Just not as "friendly" as CRT or
WinQVT.
[snip]
--
Rick Snover, San Diego, CA (Remove "SPAMLESS." to reply by e-mail.)
HomePage: http://www.netcom.com/~rsnover
Usenet Ref Links: http://www.netcom.com/~rsnover/usenet_guide.html
ix Usenet SPAM Stats: http://www.netcom.com/~rsnover/spam_stats.html
Fair Access Policy: http://www.netcom.com/~rsnover/netcom_fairaccess.html
Henry Yen
>> if your firewall is a basic one, you might be able to get around it,
>> but you'll need cooperation from some outside server anyway. and if
>email the guy who used to run IS. :-) He set it up. He's not liked
>there, but he and I had met previously and gotten along. :-)
a couple of thoughts (after reading some of the other responses on this
thread). it's trivial to set up a web-to-telnet system or even
a port redirector, but the point is well taken that breaking one's
own security policy may not be such a good idea. also, if the goal
is primarily to do e-mail maintenance, then you could probably hack this
without using telnet at all (when procmail runs, you are free to
fire up a shell, programmatically controlled at that time, of course).
a mention was also made to try to telnet to the firewall first, then
out from there. this is not going to work for the integrated (read:
black box) firewalls out there, including routers, as they aren't
running a general-purpose system (e.g. *nix). oh, also with regards
to a web-to-telnet (i think i read recently on freshmeat.net about
someone making up some cgi scripts to accomplish this) or a simple
port redirector: this also doubly stomps all over security, as there
is now an additional _insecure_ security hole, both for your
main account (slightly) as well as for your netcom account (not so slightly).
>Re. the data trails, I think the sysadmin is too green to notice,
>at least for the time being. And by the time he does, I will have
modern firewalls do this by themselves. they're quite clever, although
not perfect.
>> by the way ISI.EDU is one of the sacred keepers of the internet flame.
>> among other things, they run IANA (internet assigned numbers authority),
>> i believe (the source of all things numerical and internet). so --
>> perhaps billy "bought" this class B range from iana and called it
>> his own private "Link Local" network.
>
>:-) At first I wondered if someone at USC was totally hacking into our
>network!
well, in a certain way, your suspicions could be interpreted as being
correct. the balance of power at entities such as ietf, iana, and
others is, ummm, not too balanced; the problem is that if someone
(hmm. some_specific_one...) at isi wants to hack something they
would easily be able to do it. but it's not "our" network they'd
be ***ing with, it's _T_ _H_ _E_ network (at least in the us).
Greg Andrews
>Dallman Ross <d m a n @ n e t c o m . c o m> writes:
>> Tom Lane <t...@netcom.com> spake thusly:
>>> My guess is that all you need to do is install a telnet client
>>> application and you're set.
>
>> You mean as in CRT? I will know that for sure in a couple of hours, but
>> I don't think so. Or maybe you mean install one on the server? Yeah,
>> that seems to be what you must mean. Okay. Doesn't SCO UNIX come with
>> that turned on?
>
>Oh, I was blithely assuming that you wanted to do this from Windoze
>(possibly because you crossposted into netcom.software.ibm-pc).
>Last I heard, Windows doesn't come with a telnet client already
>installed.
>
On Win 3.1 and Win95 it's C:\Windows\telnet.exe.
-Greg
--
::::::::::::::::::: Greg Andrews ge...@netcom.com :::::::::::::::::::
Why does man kill? He kills for food. And not only food: frequently
there must be a beverage.
-- Woody Allen, "Without Feathers"
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
m a n @netcom.com Dallman Ross
Yes, that's why he had me confused, all right. I knew that. Except
that it's not standard on Win 3.1x. In fact, the only MS telnet client
for that platform (that I know of) is still formally called "beta," and
comes with "beta" MS TCP/IP for Win 3.1x, an optional download package
that is not on the Win 3.1x install diskettes.
The telnet.exe in Win 95 and up is, as you and others have pointed out,
"standard." (Theough I don't think it installs if you don't install
TCP/IP.)
Thanks to all for some very worthwhile comments. That includes Greg,
Henry, and Tom.
(Right now I'm running serious sleep deprivation because I get home and
need to do some things via telnet. My new job is an hour's drive away,
which doesn't help.)
I want to read USENET for research for my job. I don't want to use a
browser to do that. I also don't see a big risk for one telnet out,
although I did consider your point, Greg.
Right now I haven't even gotten my internal mail there to work yet.
We'll see more tomorrow.
rmt...@netcom.com
Rick Snover <rsn...@SPAMLESS.ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>In article <uo9vhox...@netcom.netcom.com>, Tom Lane <t...@netcom.com> wrote:
>>> Tom Lane <t...@netcom.com> spake thusly:
>>>> My guess is that all you need to do is install a telnet client
>>>> application and you're set.
>>
>>> You mean as in CRT? I will know that for sure in a couple of hours, but
>>> I don't think so. Or maybe you mean install one on the server? Yeah,
>>> that seems to be what you must mean. Okay. Doesn't SCO UNIX come with
>>> that turned on?
>>
>>Oh, I was blithely assuming that you wanted to do this from Windoze
>>(possibly because you crossposted into netcom.software.ibm-pc).
>>Last I heard, Windows doesn't come with a telnet client already
>
>FWIW: Windows has had built-in telnet clients since Win95: Select
>Start|Run and type telnet. FTP, too. Just not as "friendly" as CRT or
>WinQVT.
HyperTerminal can be a telnet client, too.
Shawn
: HyperTerminal can be a telnet client, too.
Not the one that comes with Windows 95.. You would need the upgraded
Hyperterminal that you can download off their (Hilgraeve's) web page,
or the Hyperterminal that's in Win98. :)
rmt...@netcom.com
>rmt...@netcom.com <rmt...@netcom.com> wrote:
>: HyperTerminal can be a telnet client, too.
>
>Not the one that comes with Windows 95.. You would need the upgraded
>Hyperterminal that you can download off their (Hilgraeve's) web page,
>or the Hyperterminal that's in Win98. :)
Possibly. I've got the so-called Win95b. I'm pretty certain its
HyperTerminal can do it. I have upgraded it twice and now use a
different program, though, so my memory may be foggy.
m a n @netcom.com Dallman Ross
> Not the one that comes with Windows 95.. You would need the upgraded
> Hyperterminal that you can download off their (Hilgraeve's) web page,
> or the Hyperterminal that's in Win98. :)
That's the other thing: I'd be perfectly willing to dial up with
a modem. But we have digital lines that I can't get through by modem.
:-(
Shawn
: In article <southernE...@netcom.com>, Shawn <sout...@netcom.com> wrote:
: >rmt...@netcom.com <rmt...@netcom.com> wrote:
: >: HyperTerminal can be a telnet client, too.
: >
: >Not the one that comes with Windows 95.. You would need the upgraded
: >Hyperterminal that you can download off their (Hilgraeve's) web page,
: >or the Hyperterminal that's in Win98. :)
: Possibly. I've got the so-called Win95b. I'm pretty certain its
: HyperTerminal can do it. I have upgraded it twice and now use a
: different program, though, so my memory may be foggy.
I'll check my copy of OSR2 tomorrow, but I don't believe that its'
Hyperterminal will do it either.. Very few applications where
changed between OSR1 and OSR2, mostly just new features were added
and bugs fixed. :)
As I recall, it only had (under "connections") your modem listed, and
then "Direct To Com1", "Direct to Com2", etc..
Shawn
--
Make both love and war; Get married.
Shawn
: I'll check my copy of OSR2 tomorrow, but I don't believe that its'
: Hyperterminal will do it either.. Very few applications where
: changed between OSR1 and OSR2, mostly just new features were added
: and bugs fixed. :)
I just checked OSR2, and it's Hyperterminal doesn't support TCP/IP.
:)
Shawn
--
A yer ago I kudnt spel progrmer; now i R won.
Barry Margolin
>gateway. To see it done, check out
>
>http://coulomb.mechanik.th-darmstadt.de/user/Telnet/
That's not really a telnet gateway, it's a Java applet that makes a Telnet
connection.
I can't really think of a good way in which an HTTP->Telnet gateway could
be done. HTTP is transaction oriented (you send "GET <document>", the
server sends back the document), while Telnet is interactive and
asynchronous.
--
Barry Margolin
BBN Planet, Cambridge, MA
bar...@bbnplanet.com or bar...@netcom.com