Why do you need another way? What's wrong with the "telnet" command?
To reference some other answers, on a somewhat current Cisco router, here are available options for the telnet command:
Router#telnet 1.1.1.1 ?
/debug Enable telnet debugging mode
/encrypt Negotiate telnet encryption
/ipv4 Force use of IP version 4
/ipv6 Force use of IP version 6
/line Enable telnet line mode
/noecho Disable local echo
/quiet Suppress login/logout messages
/route: Enable telnet source route mode
/source-interface Specify source interface
/stream Enable stream processing
/terminal-type Set terminal type
<0-65535> Port number
bgp Border Gateway Protocol (179)
chargen Character generator (19)
cmd Remote commands (rcmd, 514)
daytime Daytime (13)
discard Discard (9)
domain Domain Name Service (53)
drip Dynamic Routing Information Protocol (3949)
echo Echo (7)
exec Exec (rsh, 512)
finger Finger (79)
ftp File Transfer Protocol (21)
ftp-data FTP data connections (20)
gopher Gopher (70)
hostname NIC hostname server (101)
ident Ident Protocol (113)
irc Internet Relay Chat (194)
klogin Kerberos login (543)
kshell Kerberos shell (544)
login Login (rlogin, 513)
lpd Printer service (515)
nntp Network News Transport Protocol (119)
pim-auto-rp PIM Auto-RP (496)
pop2 Post Office Protocol v2 (109)
pop3 Post Office Protocol v3 (110)
smtp Simple Mail Transport Protocol (25)
sunrpc Sun Remote Procedure Call (111)
syslog Syslog (514)
tacacs TAC Access Control System (49)
talk Talk (517)
telnet Telnet (23)
time Time (37)
uucp Unix-to-Unix Copy Program (540)
whois Nicname (43)
www World Wide Web (HTTP, 80)