Al 08/06/12 08:22, En/na Peter Lothberg ha escrit:
I've got also some emulated PDP10 which I've not networked (yet). I'm
having trouble plugging into DECNET a TOPS20/Panda machine... If someone
could point me to any docs I would appreciate it a lot
Does Ethernet-Multicast get set up correclty on your host?
Well, after struggling all day with those machines, I've got both the TOPS20 and TOPS10 KHL10 systems visibles from DECNET. So those machines are now in HECnet as nodes 6.78 (BITXT2) and 6.80 (BITXT1). Don't ever try to find logic in my node number assignement. It used to be rational, but right now is a mess... :)
To cut the story short, I run the KLH10s inside a virtualbox VM instead of running them in bare metal. Why? Two reasons: for some reason the dte interface gets wedged when I run it on iron, and second, that's the way I can assign a dedicated ethernet adapter for each instance.
The problem was that KLH10 failed to set up the interfaces to promiscuous mode, and failed also to change the hardware address. I "fixed" it doing it before firing the emulator, using ifconfig. Now both machines can set up DECNET and it seems to work.
Things to be fixed, or learnt yet:
1) Defining the permanent node database for both TOPS10 and TOPS20. NCP rejects the DEFINE NODE commands. I guess there is some sort of utility like the one in RSX (CFE) to define the "permanent" node list, but I've not been able to find that one. There is a NIPGEN in TOPS-10 to build a CMD file with the SET NODE commands, but no NIPGEN in TOPS-20 that I've been able to find...
2) LAT. LAT works fine in TOPS-20. In TOPS-10 LCP tells me LAT is active, but it does not work (does not even announce itself). How do I enable LAT in TOPS-10?
3) And, spealking of LAT... How do I change the service identification in TOPS-20? I mean, how do I change it PERMANENTLY? I guess I have to put it in some sort of auto-executing file. SYSTEM.CMD? Something in 7-1-CONFIG.CMD? Again, any pointer to docs would be very appreciated. I don't want to bug you with the thousands of questions I've got :)
4) A few minutes after startup of TOPS-10. I get the following message at the console:
CCPOEF Output error on DSKB:SER001.EXE[10,1], status=40017
It does not seem to have any advert effect, but I'd like to know what's wrong. I've not seen such a message in my KS-based TOPS-10 running under SIMH.
Now, I've got to install in the KLH10 TOPS-10 all the stuff I've got... :) That will keep me busy for a while.
On 2012-06-08 21:28, Paul_Koning at Dell.com wrote:
On Jun 8, 2012, at 3:18 PM, Johnny Billquist wrote:
On 2012-06-08 19:02, Paul_Koning at Dell.com wrote:
...
Thanks for making me re-read the DELQA manual again. :-)
You're very welcome!
I'm not totally clear on this point. This might be getting a little too technical and offtopic here, but basically, reading the manual, it might appear that having several unicast addresses in the setup might only be respected if you are running your DELQA in DEQNA mode, and the manual warn against potential performance issues if you do this.
But I had forgotten quite a lot of the DEQNA/DELQA anyway, including that you were supposed to fill the table with your own address to make it full. Gah! I've never liked the Q-bus ethernet controllers. And they are so buggy...
Johnny
QNA, yes -- it was abandoned after revision L still didn't work right. LQA is a completely new design that does work, but it is compatible at the driver level with QNA (or nearly so).
There are bugs in the LQA as well. But yes, it is a totally different design than the QNA.
The address match is really very simple. There are no bugs here... the hardware has a 16 entry table and it accepts packets whenever the DA matches any of the 16 entries (essentially a 16 entry CAM). There are no "valid" bits (as you might find in some more advanced CAMs) so it treats all 16 entries as meaningful addresses. That means you have to fill in all 16.
Yes.
If you don't need 16 distinct values, you simply pad the table with extra copies of any of the meaningful values; that way the result is what you want. The easiest way to do that is to make extra copies of the entry that specifies the MAC address, but that isn't necessary, it is mentioned only because it's easy to remember.
Right.
But there are some interesting passages in the manual.
"
More than one physical address may be specified, but in Normal mode, only the first is used for receiving datagrams, and as the source address for system ID messages generated by the DELQA. In DEQNA-lock mode the specifications of multiple physical Ethernet addesses will cause the DELQA to filter all such physical Ethernet addesses for packet reception.
NOTE
Enabling more than one physical address is not recommended under normal circumstances. This may have a substantial impact on performance.
"
What do you make of that?
Johnny
On Jun 8, 2012, at 3:18 PM, Johnny Billquist wrote:
On 2012-06-08 19:02, Paul_Koning at Dell.com wrote:
...
Thanks for making me re-read the DELQA manual again. :-)
You're very welcome!
I'm not totally clear on this point. This might be getting a little too technical and offtopic here, but basically, reading the manual, it might appear that having several unicast addresses in the setup might only be respected if you are running your DELQA in DEQNA mode, and the manual warn against potential performance issues if you do this.
But I had forgotten quite a lot of the DEQNA/DELQA anyway, including that you were supposed to fill the table with your own address to make it full. Gah! I've never liked the Q-bus ethernet controllers. And they are so buggy...
Johnny
QNA, yes -- it was abandoned after revision L still didn't work right. LQA is a completely new design that does work, but it is compatible at the driver level with QNA (or nearly so).
The address match is really very simple. There are no bugs here... the hardware has a 16 entry table and it accepts packets whenever the DA matches any of the 16 entries (essentially a 16 entry CAM). There are no "valid" bits (as you might find in some more advanced CAMs) so it treats all 16 entries as meaningful addresses. That means you have to fill in all 16.
If you don't need 16 distinct values, you simply pad the table with extra copies of any of the meaningful values; that way the result is what you want. The easiest way to do that is to make extra copies of the entry that specifies the MAC address, but that isn't necessary, it is mentioned only because it's easy to remember.
paul
On 2012-06-08 19:02, Paul_Koning at Dell.com wrote:
On Jun 8, 2012, at 10:50 AM, Johnny Billquist wrote:
On 2012-06-08 16:42, Paul_Koning at Dell.com wrote:
...
That's true if you have a NIC and driver that only allows one individual address per physical MAC. Most modern NICs allow multiple individual addresses since the address filter is an exact match on N (say, 16 or so) addresses, and it doesn't care whether those are individual or multicast. The host OS drivers may or may not export that feature. If they do, then you don't need promiscuous mode. If they don't, or if the NIC is old enough that it can't do this, then you do.
Interesting. I wasn't aware that NICs had filters that didn't make a difference between multicast and unicast anymore... Seems potentially bad if you start using IP multicast, since that can easily become a whole bunch of multicast addresses, and then I guess you'll have to turn on promiscuous mode anyway.
A typical modern NIC has (a) a modest-sized list of exact match filters, (b) a hash (CRC) based multicast filter, and usually (c) a separate flag to enable broadcast. So if you have at most, say, 16 unicast + multicast addresses enabled, it uses (a); if you have at most 16 unicast but too many multicast addresses, it uses (b) to do an approximate filter of the multicasts with the exact match done in the driver, and if you ask for more than 16 unicasts it will tell you that it can't do that.
I have forgotten most of what I might have known of modern NICs, I think...
The old DEC controllers for PDP-11s have a list of multicast addresses that you want to receive, so they do filter on multicast, but that list is for multicast only. There is only one unicast address.
(Those controllers also have a separate multicast promiscuous mode, except it don't work on the DEQNA and DELQA...)
Johnny
That's not quite true. DEC, not surprisingly, was the first to identify the need for multiple unicast support in NICs, so the DECnet Ethernet datalink spec calls for it and all except the very oldest DEC NICs support that. Specifically, QNA and LQA do, because they take a 16 entry address filter. The QNA manual says that you put in the MAC address, broadcast, multicast addresses, plus extra copies of the MAC address, but in fact the device is perfectly happy to accept additional individual addresses. I believe VMS (and possibly other OSs) took advantage of this to allow LAT to come up first with the ROM based MAC address, then enable DECnet with its address without disturbing LAT.
Thanks for making me re-read the DELQA manual again. :-)
I'm not totally clear on this point. This might be getting a little too technical and offtopic here, but basically, reading the manual, it might appear that having several unicast addresses in the setup might only be respected if you are running your DELQA in DEQNA mode, and the manual warn against potential performance issues if you do this.
But I had forgotten quite a lot of the DEQNA/DELQA anyway, including that you were supposed to fill the table with your own address to make it full. Gah! I've never liked the Q-bus ethernet controllers. And they are so buggy...
Johnny
On 8 Jun 2012, at 16:58, Steve Davidson wrote:
PATHWORKS for MAC V1.3...
That's one option. Alternatively, I have White Pine Softwares Mac320 Terminal emulation package in a box on my shelf (original complete and working) which includes Thursby's DECnet stack, TSSnet (although I don't think/know if it is capable of file sharing in the Mac320 package). It works well as a terminal program but it's pretty antiquated and barely works on Macintosh System 7.0 (it was originally designed for Macintosh System 6.0). I have it installed on my SE/30 50MHz and it did okay. Wasn't anything special though.
Some guy gave me that about 12 years ago. I had no idea what it was but he insisted. Kind a cool I eventually got to use it :)
--
Mark Benson
http://DECtec.info
Twitter: @DECtecInfo
HECnet: STAR69::MARK
Online Resource & Mailing List for DEC Enthusiasts.
On Jun 8, 2012, at 10:50 AM, Johnny Billquist wrote:
On 2012-06-08 16:42, Paul_Koning at Dell.com wrote:
...
That's true if you have a NIC and driver that only allows one individual address per physical MAC. Most modern NICs allow multiple individual addresses since the address filter is an exact match on N (say, 16 or so) addresses, and it doesn't care whether those are individual or multicast. The host OS drivers may or may not export that feature. If they do, then you don't need promiscuous mode. If they don't, or if the NIC is old enough that it can't do this, then you do.
Interesting. I wasn't aware that NICs had filters that didn't make a difference between multicast and unicast anymore... Seems potentially bad if you start using IP multicast, since that can easily become a whole bunch of multicast addresses, and then I guess you'll have to turn on promiscuous mode anyway.
A typical modern NIC has (a) a modest-sized list of exact match filters, (b) a hash (CRC) based multicast filter, and usually (c) a separate flag to enable broadcast. So if you have at most, say, 16 unicast + multicast addresses enabled, it uses (a); if you have at most 16 unicast but too many multicast addresses, it uses (b) to do an approximate filter of the multicasts with the exact match done in the driver, and if you ask for more than 16 unicasts it will tell you that it can't do that.
The old DEC controllers for PDP-11s have a list of multicast addresses that you want to receive, so they do filter on multicast, but that list is for multicast only. There is only one unicast address.
(Those controllers also have a separate multicast promiscuous mode, except it don't work on the DEQNA and DELQA...)
Johnny
That's not quite true. DEC, not surprisingly, was the first to identify the need for multiple unicast support in NICs, so the DECnet Ethernet datalink spec calls for it and all except the very oldest DEC NICs support that. Specifically, QNA and LQA do, because they take a 16 entry address filter. The QNA manual says that you put in the MAC address, broadcast, multicast addresses, plus extra copies of the MAC address, but in fact the device is perfectly happy to accept additional individual addresses. I believe VMS (and possibly other OSs) took advantage of this to allow LAT to come up first with the ROM based MAC address, then enable DECnet with its address without disturbing LAT.
paul
I wonder if that'll run in Basilisk - could pop up an emulated 68k classic System Mac on HECnet too..
Sampsa
On 8 Jun 2012, at 16:58, Steve Davidson wrote:
PATHWORKS for MAC V1.3...
-Steve
On Fri, Jun 08, 2012 at 12:32:04PM +0100, Peter Coghlan wrote:
(How come I can remember this stuff and I have trouble remembering what
happened yesterday!)
That condition is a "medical" impairment whereby your brain is unable to
successfuly transfer information from short term memory to long term memory,
because you have a combination of too many toxins and not enough of the necessary
nutrients to support building new neuronal pathways. Modern toxins are:
MonoSodium Glutamate, Aspartame, Fluoride, Cesium, Plutonium, Uranium, etc...
and the nutrients you need are not likely in the modern version of what people
mistakenly call "food" but is mostly devoid of anything due to soil depletion.
An example of something intended to help people like you (including all of us)
is "cognition ignition" product from http://www.nutrimedical.com/
I have no relationship with Dr. Deagle's operations other than that I am a
customer of some of his products. He is a leader in anti-aging research.
Since mostly only us old-school old-farts care about DECtech, I considered
the relevancy factor high enough here to venture a bit "off topic".
--
Aloha, Avination: Celestial Angela; 2ndLife: Celeste Python; Angela Kahealani
"(I'll) Be Seeing You..." All information and transactions are private between
the parties, and are non negotiable. All rights reserve without prejudice by
Angela Kahealani http://www.kahealani.com/kahealani/angela_kahealani.html
PATHWORKS for MAC V1.3...
-Steve
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE
[mailto:owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE] On Behalf Of Gregg Levine
Sent: Friday, June 08, 2012 11:09
To: hecnet at update.uu.se
Subject: Re: [HECnet] Multinet Tunnel Connections to SG1::
On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 4:06 AM, Sampsa Laine <sampsa at mac.com> wrote:
On 8 Jun 2012, at 00:10, Dave McGuire wrote:
Of course it'd be preferable in a dozen ways to have the native
kernel-based DECnet support continue to be maintained, alongside
IPv4, IPv6, etc where it belongs...but if we can't find
anyone to do
that work, we'll have to solve the problem some other way, when it
actually becomes a problem.
The upside of this solution is that it's relatively
portable though - I'd love to have a DECNET stack on my OS X
boxes, for example (in fact as mentioned before latd DOES
work on OS X as it's kinda implemented in a similar way)..
Sampsa
Hello!
At one point in time, the OS for the Mac did speak natively
to the DEC family of hardware. It would be very interesting
to find out how they did it. This would greatly benefit
Sampsa at least.
As for us? Excellent question.
-----
Gregg C Levine gregg.drwho8 at gmail.com
"This signature fought the Time Wars, time and again."
On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 11:21 AM, Mark Benson <md.benson at gmail.com> wrote:
On 8 Jun 2012, at 16:09, Gregg Levine <gregg.drwho8 at gmail.com> wrote:
Hello!
At one point in time, the OS for the Mac did speak natively to the DEC
family of hardware.
Do you mean OS X ir Classic Mac OS?
It would be very interesting to find out how they
did it. This would greatly benefit Sampsa at least.
If it's OS X It'd benefit me too provided it still works on modern versions.
--
Mark Benson
http://markbenson.org/bloghttp://twitter.com/MDBenson
Hello!
Oh okay. Consider this, it was for the classic Mac. And the big guys.
Shortly before the PowerPC processor was released. I remember going to
a trade show that showed just such a network being there. They had
everything named, including a VAX named VAX Masterston. I pointed out
that the original name retired from being a gunfighter and ended up
becoming a New York sportswriter.
He died soon after that and ended up in Woodlawn. I can't recall if he
was present at that gunfight.
All of that took place sometime in the late 80s.
-----
Gregg C Levine gregg.drwho8 at gmail.com
"This signature fought the Time Wars, time and again."