"Brian Schenkenberger, VAXman-" <system at TMESIS.COM> writes:
"Brian Schenkenberger, VAXman-" <system at TMESIS.COM> writes:
"Rob Jarratt" <robert.jarratt at ntlworld.com> writes: > >>My user mode
DECnet router has started telling me that it is getting >>messages for
routing specification version 2.2.0. Phase IV is 2.0.0. I >>am assuming
this is Phase V messages because there has been talk about >>this
recently. > >Does anyone have a link to the Phase V Routing
Specification? > >The specs for OSI were huge. > >Will this link help
you any? >
http://bitsavers.trailing-edge.com/pdf/dec/decnet/EK-DNAPV-GD_DECnet_Phase_…
Other that this, you're best bet would be the DECNET Documentation.
It >should all be on-line at http://HP.COM/go/OpenVMS.
...and from my personal library:
DECnet Phase V: An OSI Implementation (James Martin, Joe Leben)
Copyright 1992 Digital Press EY-H8832E-DP ISBN 1-55558-076-9
If you're really wanting the specs, they can all be ordered up here:
http://www.iso.org/iso/home/store/catalogue_ics/catalogue_ics_browse.htm?IC…
--
VAXman- A Bored Certified VMS Kernel Mode Hacker VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)ORG
Well I speak to machines with the voice of humanity.
"Brian Schenkenberger, VAXman-" <system at TMESIS.COM> writes:
"Rob Jarratt" <robert.jarratt at ntlworld.com> writes:
My user mode DECnet router has started telling me that it is getting
messages for routing specification version 2.2.0. Phase IV is 2.0.0. I
am assuming this is Phase V messages because there has been talk about
this recently. > >Does anyone have a link to the Phase V Routing
Specification?
The specs for OSI were huge.
Will this link help you any?
http://bitsavers.trailing-edge.com/pdf/dec/decnet/EK-DNAPV-GD_DECnet_Phase_…
Other that this, you're best bet would be the DECNET Documentation. It
should all be on-line at http://HP.COM/go/OpenVMS.
...and from my personal library:
DECnet Phase V: An OSI Implementation (James Martin, Joe Leben)
Copyright 1992 Digital Press
EY-H8832E-DP
ISBN 1-55558-076-9
--
VAXman- A Bored Certified VMS Kernel Mode Hacker VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)ORG
Well I speak to machines with the voice of humanity.
"Rob Jarratt" <robert.jarratt at ntlworld.com> writes:
My user mode DECnet router has started telling me that it is getting
messages for routing specification version 2.2.0. Phase IV is 2.0.0. I
am assuming this is Phase V messages because there has been talk about
this recently.
Does anyone have a link to the Phase V Routing Specification?
The specs for OSI were huge.
Will this link help you any?
http://bitsavers.trailing-edge.com/pdf/dec/decnet/EK-DNAPV-GD_DECnet_Phase_…
Other that this, you're best bet would be the DECNET Documentation.
It should all be on-line at http://HP.COM/go/OpenVMS.
--
VAXman- A Bored Certified VMS Kernel Mode Hacker VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)ORG
Well I speak to machines with the voice of humanity.
I have put details of my Guest account and its password into my info.txt
file. Wondering if I should remove that now.... (query for "vax780" to see).
Regards
Rob
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE [mailto:owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE]
On Behalf Of sampsa at mac.com
Sent: 17 December 2012 19:42
To: hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Subject: Re: [HECnet] Statistics
BTW, this is what we are talking about:
http://rhesus.sampsa.com/cgi-bin/hecnetinfo/hecnetinfo.com
It's not all THAT interesting to even random people on the wider
Internet...
sampsa
On 17 Dec 2012, at 21:41, sampsa at mac.com wrote:
OK, I'll make it opt-in - if there's an INFO.TXT in the public FAL dir,
I'll run
the NCP commands, otherwise I'll show nothing.
Is that OK with you?
sampsa
On 17 Dec 2012, at 21:33, Peter Coghlan <HECNET at beyondthepale.ie>
wrote:
With this in mind, I'm considering adding an opt-out system for the
HECnet info system on RHESUS, maybe a NOINFO.TXT file in the public
FAL directory and it won't run the NCP SHOW EXECs?
Or is everyone OK with what RHESUS is doing now?
That kind of depends on what exactly RHESUS is doing now.
I'm quite happy for anyone on HECnet to send commands to my NML
servers or to make information from my systems available to others on
HECnet. However I am nervous of making this information available to
anyone who wants it on the wider internet, particularly if it is a
spur of the moment kind of thing which is changing by the hour
without much thought being given to the implications.
I don't think opt-out is a good way to go. People who have not
carefully combed through the 80 plus mails to the mailing list today
will not realise that they are being required to opt out from
something that they did not know they were opting in to.
Regards,
Peter Coghlan.
My user mode DECnet router has started telling me that it is getting messages for routing specification version 2.2.0. Phase IV is 2.0.0. I am assuming this is Phase V messages because there has been talk about this recently.
Does anyone have a link to the Phase V Routing Specification?
Thanks
Rob
On 18 Dec 2012, at 12:57, Brian Schenkenberger, VAXman- wrote:
WRT DECtek
It's spelled with a 'c' not a 'k' ;)
aren't you re-inventing the wheel? There already exists such
a list (Info-VAX) and it's gatewayed to the usenet comp.os.vms groupt. I
think that if it's more overarching info you're looking for that you might
want to look there -- at least, for VMS related topics. There are several
DECcentric usenet groups which cover DEC hardware and PDP focus as well --
I'm not aware of mailing list gateways in the latter case.
Allow new to explain. For one the list is not 'just' VMS or 'just' PDP or 'just' this or just that. It is intended ad a general discussion forum for all manner of DEC hardware, software and such. It's intention is to be a friendly and accessible community also, not too hardcore/full-on like a lot of the established ancient DEC groups. For sure they have their place and I've consulted comp.os.vms for information *about VMS* before now, but frivolous banter tends to be frowned upon, new people seem to be treated with passive disdain by some members, and often the people offering advice tend to not remember what it was like learning OSs like VMS, TOPS, RSX and the like from scratch, or working on unfamiliar hardware. For that reason I really love the HECnet community because their is a good mixc of people of all ability levels, we are generally easy going folks in a relaxed atmosphere. I wanted to try and extend the community by giving us an area to discuss stuff that wasn't HECnet related.
I also wanted to gather knowledge in a Wiki that was searchable and reference-able but apparently being able to find the information we need easily spoils the fun? ;)
--
Mark Benson
http://DECtec.info
Twitter: @DECtecInfo
HECnet: STAR69::MARK
Online Resource & Mailing List for DEC Enthusiasts.
On Dec 18, 2012, at 1:05 PM, Clem Cole wrote:
Paul. given the time (late 1960's/early 70's) the prevailing page sizes were 64 / 128 / 256 / 512 bytes which just happen to map to the sizes of blocks used in disk controllers. 1/4/8 k pages were a few years in the future.
512 bytes, sure. I'm wondering about other sector sizes. RC11 had 64 byte sectors, RF11 2 byte "sectors". I don't remember any other sector sizes on DEC gear. CDC 6000 series had 322 12-bit word sectors. IBM 360 series used whatever sector size you wanted, varying from sector to sector if you were so inclined.
The PDP11 MMU is an odd beast -- physical start on 64 byte granularity, page size variable between 64 bytes and 8192 bytes, but virtual base addresses only multiples of 8192 bytes.
paul
On 12/18/2012 02:34 AM, Mark Benson wrote:
The mailing list *is* intended for HECnet specific things, and of course there pops up tangental questions, but Hercules and other things are a little too far out, if you ask me.
I have already tried to promote an alternative forum for the more wide ranging topics by starting the DECtec mailing list which is a wider overarching enthusiast list for DEC/Compaq/HP users. In spite of many people from this list also being also subscribed to DECtec it doesn't seem to have worked all that well. The list is mostly silent.
The whole idea was prompted by a past period when the list got jammed with non-on-topic posts, a lot of which were interesting and valuable, but didn't concern HECnet.
Well let's stir up some traffic on the DECtec list, then. I've CC'd
this reply there.
The only problem I see with this approach is that of membership.
Off-topic conversations occur here because we have the "right" mix of
people for certain conversations, and those people want those
conversations to occur. (otherwise they wouldn't start them or
participate in them)
If we can urge everyone here who is interested in such conversations
(hopefully a large percentage) to also subscribe to DECtec, and leave
this mailing list for HECnet-operations-related discussion, would that
not address the issue?
-Dave
--
Dave McGuire, AK4HZ
New Kensington, PA
From: <Paul_Koning at Dell.com>
On Dec 17, 2012, at 6:01 PM, Johnny Billquist wrote:
To make it clear - the PDP-11 have a very normal MMU with pages.
Semi-normal. It's rather unusual in that it has a paged MMU with page
address granularity different from the page size (64 bytes vs. 8k bytes).
Yes that's true, and can be annoying (fragmentation), but at least it's
optional -- if you want to you can do everything on 8 KB boundaries and
then it's just like any later MMU, except that you'll run out of core in
no time.
John Wilson
D Bit
Paul. given the time (late 1960's/early 70's) the prevailing page sizes were 64 / 128 / 256 / 512 bytes which just happen to map to the sizes of blocks used in disk controllers. 1/4/8 k pages were a few years in the future.
by the virtual address extension to the 11 ( aka 1975 's vax 11/780) DEC switched to 512 bytes.
That said as wnj would point out in the "fast vax" paper by 1979 512 bytes was to small.
Clem
On Dec 18, 2012, at 9:45 AM, <Paul_Koning at Dell.com> wrote:
On Dec 17, 2012, at 6:01 PM, Johnny Billquist wrote:
On 2012-12-17 23:50, Boyanich, Alastair wrote:
...
2) Was 2.11BSD ever ported to other platforms? Given the age/era, I'm
curious about 8088/8086/NECv20/80286 given the banked memory models used
and looking at the 8088/8086 XENIX disassembly.
Nope. That would not have been 2BSD then. And since the PDP-11 don't even have banked memory, it would probably cause some headaches to port 2BSD to something like 80286 or other similar machines.
To make it clear - the PDP-11 have a very normal MMU with pages.
Semi-normal. It's rather unusual in that it has a paged MMU with page address granularity different from the page size (64 bytes vs. 8k bytes). Most architectures have those two match, that avoids an adder -- consider VAX or MIPS or Alpha.
paul
