I clearly forgot about the DECsystems!
The costs on my network were based on the fact that I run both the
bridge and the tunnels. In addition I took into account that some areas
connect into my site as well as either Bob's or Sampsa's. I calculated
the costs per circuit and came up with the values that I use. My values
only work one way though and did not take into consideration what the
other end used UNLESS I could influence that end. I do influence
several, but not all of the connections into this network.
I believe that we need a map to figure this out correctly. Just stating
that everyone should be using a particular value does not always work.
As an example look at Fred's network (area 33 - mid America). In theory
he is connected to both area 2 (West Coast), and area 19 (East Coast) -
let's forget the new link to Europe for the moment because that has
issues that have yet to be addressed. The connection between the US and
Europe mostly goes from the East Coast, so in Fred's case the costs (at
Fred's end at a mimimum) should be set to favour the Eastern route.
This is just one example, I expect that this is not an isolated case.
Fred's network has multiple routes because, let's face it, links fail!
It is the right choice (for his network).
One way to look at this might be to declare a fixed set of Multinet hubs
and map against that. In the US it does makes sense to pick a Western
and Eastern hub. Each area in the US connects to both hubs. These hubs
connect to Europe at the same points, either the bridge, the tunnels, or
both. I see this as a maximum availability plan. We would still need
to look at link speeds and Internet hop counts but it could (should)
work. This same plan could be applied to anywhere. I only have first
hand knowledge of the US sites.
I prefer the tunnels for data intensive transactions but use the bridge
for LAT and MOM/MOP. I do have the flexibility to manimulate the costs
at any time to deal with network loads. I do this when I have to copy
large numbers of files to/form Europe against the requirement to use
LAT. In the past this network (SGC::) has been used to backup files
from nodes in Europe (just in case). The link favored has always been
the tunnel when available. This can be controlled in an automatic
fashion and in fact is. I suspect that noone has ever known when the
switches have occurred - just as it should be.
Regards,
-Steve
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE [mailto:owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE] On
Behalf Of Peter Lothberg
Sent: Tuesday, December 27, 2011 1:22 PM
To: hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Subject: RE: [HECnet] Circuit costs
LAN costs are 4 by default (for VMS nodes anyway).
Maybe on VMS, but check MIM - the UNA-0 cost is 3, not 4.
I've seen both values used; I think the default must vary depending
on the
system or OS version.
Bob
Topsxx default
NCP>sh cir ni-0-0 char
NCP>
17:19:20 NCP
Request # 52; Show Circuit Characteristics Completed
Circuit = NI-0-0
Service = Enabled
Cost = 1
Maximum Routers = 16
Router Priority = 10
Hello Timer = 15
Type = Ethernet
Adjacent Node = 59.11 (DIMMA)
Listen Timer = 45
Circuit = NI-0-0
Adjacent Node = 59.58 (STUPI)
Listen Timer = 45
(if there are more than one area router on the same LAN it will
use the one with the highest node number, no metrics...)
-P
LAN costs are 4 by default (for VMS nodes anyway).
Maybe on VMS, but check MIM - the UNA-0 cost is 3, not 4.
I've seen both values used; I think the default must vary depending on the
system or OS version.
Bob
Topsxx default
NCP>sh cir ni-0-0 char
NCP>
17:19:20 NCP
Request # 52; Show Circuit Characteristics Completed
Circuit = NI-0-0
Service = Enabled
Cost = 1
Maximum Routers = 16
Router Priority = 10
Hello Timer = 15
Type = Ethernet
Adjacent Node = 59.11 (DIMMA)
Listen Timer = 45
Circuit = NI-0-0
Adjacent Node = 59.58 (STUPI)
Listen Timer = 45
(if there are more than one area router on the same LAN it will
use the one with the highest node number, no metrics...)
-P
Hey folks...
LAN costs are 4 by default (for VMS nodes anyway). If we make use of
that then all we have to touch are the Multinet circuits. I set my
Multinet circuits to 3 because they are much faster and I would prefer
to use the most "efficient" path possible. You will loose the ability
to use SET HOST/LAT, and MOM/MOP, and LAD/LAST, but that should me
minor...
-Steve
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE [mailto:owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE] On
Behalf Of Bob Armstrong
Sent: Tuesday, December 27, 2011 10:00 AM
To: hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Subject: [HECnet] Circuit costs
Peter Lothberg wrote:
Here is a suggestion....
Set all Multinet links to cost 5 in both ends
Set all bridged Ethernet interfaces to 10
Set all Multinet link nodes Level2 Area Routers =20
Well, I like it. I'll do it if you do it...
Actually that's a problem with DECnet - everybody _has_ to do their
own;
circuit costs are individually defined per node.
Bob
That's why I suggested that the ones with LAN's attached to WAN-bridges up
their metrics. So Normal Ethernet-Ethernet will be prefered over Ip-tunnels..
ETPTH>legato
[Routing path from SOL (59.10) to LEGATO (2.1)]
Ok,
Then let's make the Multinet links by default to be 2. I would avoid 1,
for now unless you need to force something.
-Steve
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE [mailto:owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE] On
Behalf Of Bob Armstrong
Sent: Tuesday, December 27, 2011 10:55 AM
To: hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Subject: RE: [HECnet] Circuit costs
LAN costs are 4 by default (for VMS nodes anyway).
Maybe on VMS, but check MIM - the UNA-0 cost is 3, not 4.
I've seen both values used; I think the default must vary depending on
the
system or OS version.
Bob
LAN costs are 4 by default (for VMS nodes anyway).
Maybe on VMS, but check MIM - the UNA-0 cost is 3, not 4.
I've seen both values used; I think the default must vary depending on the
system or OS version.
Bob
One script does it all. I am reworking the script so that the host will
not have to reboot. Should be ready later today. The only issue left
is the email forwarder is down (CHIMPY::). I am setting up this end to
become an email forwarder/Internet gateway.
-Steve
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE [mailto:owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE] On
Behalf Of Mark Wickens
Sent: Tuesday, December 27, 2011 8:20 AM
To: hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Subject: Re: [HECnet] ROOSTA routing problem
Steve Davidson has a few scripts which will detect an IP address change,
reconfigure the link and reboot the system. Assuming the IP only changes
'once in a while' this is a fairly painless solution.
Mark.
On 27/12/11 12:08, Peter Lothberg wrote:
On 26/12/2011 18:39, Mark Benson wrote:
On 26 Dec 2011, at 16:00, Bob Armstrong wrote:
I assumed (perhaps stupidly) that as long as Chrissie's machines
are
bridged onto HECnet somewhere using Johnny's bridge,
She's not using the bridge, though. ROOSTA has a multinet
connection to
LEGATO (which I don't mind, but as Johnny said, isn't going to
work).
Okay, well STAR69 has Multinet on it but as for tunnelling between
them
I ain't got a clue, chief, and again I can't guarantee 100% uptime
on the
link if it is opened.
So can you set up a multinet link to chrissie.homelinux.net (warning
IP
address may change ... though it doesn't do it very often and Steve
Davidson can let you know when it does) and let me know your IP
address
and I'll set up a multinet link here. That should do.
If it does down sometimes we'll just have to live with the
consequences ;-)
Chrissie
Someone had "magic" to deal with changing adresses?
Sure I can set up a link, and I'll suggest metric 5..
The VAXen with multinet is 192.108.200.211.
-P
Hey folks...
LAN costs are 4 by default (for VMS nodes anyway). If we make use of
that then all we have to touch are the Multinet circuits. I set my
Multinet circuits to 3 because they are much faster and I would prefer
to use the most "efficient" path possible. You will loose the ability
to use SET HOST/LAT, and MOM/MOP, and LAD/LAST, but that should me
minor...
-Steve
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE [mailto:owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE] On
Behalf Of Bob Armstrong
Sent: Tuesday, December 27, 2011 10:00 AM
To: hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Subject: [HECnet] Circuit costs
Peter Lothberg wrote:
Here is a suggestion....
Set all Multinet links to cost 5 in both ends
Set all bridged Ethernet interfaces to 10
Set all Multinet link nodes Level2 Area Routers
Well, I like it. I'll do it if you do it...
Actually that's a problem with DECnet - everybody _has_ to do their
own;
circuit costs are individually defined per node.
Bob
Peter Lothberg wrote:
Here is a suggestion....
Set all Multinet links to cost 5 in both ends
Set all bridged Ethernet interfaces to 10
Set all Multinet link nodes Level2 Area Routers
Well, I like it. I'll do it if you do it...
I did it on my side.
Actually that's a problem with DECnet - everybody _has_ to do their own;
circuit costs are individually defined per node.
It's the smae problem if you use OSPF or ISIS for IP... -:)
-Peter
(The person you should complain to in this case is Radia Perlman..)
Peter Lothberg wrote:
Here is a suggestion....
Set all Multinet links to cost 5 in both ends
Set all bridged Ethernet interfaces to 10
Set all Multinet link nodes Level2 Area Routers
Well, I like it. I'll do it if you do it...
Actually that's a problem with DECnet - everybody _has_ to do their own;
circuit costs are individually defined per node.
Bob
On 27 Dec 2011, at 13:16, Chrissie Caulfield wrote:
Hmm nothing is showing up at my end. Doe you have a firewall blocking
port 700/udp ?
Yes. I can open that though. Be warned that my UDP forwarding abilities
seem a bit patchy based on what Johnny and I found out when I joined HECnet
via the bridge.
Though I think you said you already had multinet running to other nodes,
so that sounds unlikely.
No I don't. I run MUTLINET as my IP stack on that machine but I have no
other links, hence why I didn't know how to set one up :)
--
Mark Benson
http://DECtec.info
Twitter: @DECtecInfo
HECnet: STAR69::MARK
Online Resource & Mailing List for DEC Enthusiasts.
Steve Davidson has a few scripts which will detect an IP address change, reconfigure the link and reboot the system. Assuming the IP only changes 'once in a while' this is a fairly painless solution.
Mark.
On 27/12/11 12:08, Peter Lothberg wrote:
On 26/12/2011 18:39, Mark Benson wrote:
On 26 Dec 2011, at 16:00, Bob Armstrong wrote:
I assumed (perhaps stupidly) that as long as Chrissie's machines are
bridged onto HECnet somewhere using Johnny's bridge,
She's not using the bridge, though. ROOSTA has a multinet connection to
LEGATO (which I don't mind, but as Johnny said, isn't going to work).
Okay, well STAR69 has Multinet on it but as for tunnelling between them
I ain't got a clue, chief, and again I can't guarantee 100% uptime on the
link if it is opened.
So can you set up a multinet link to chrissie.homelinux.net (warning IP
address may change ... though it doesn't do it very often and Steve
Davidson can let you know when it does) and let me know your IP address
and I'll set up a multinet link here. That should do.
If it does down sometimes we'll just have to live with the consequences ;-)
Chrissie
Someone had "magic" to deal with changing adresses?
Sure I can set up a link, and I'll suggest metric 5..
The VAXen with multinet is 192.108.200.211.
-P
On 27/12/2011 12:36, Mark Benson wrote:
On 27 Dec 2011, at 12:00, Chrissie Caulfield wrote:
$ multinet conf/decnet
MultiNet DECNET Circuit Configuration Utility V5.2(10)
[Reading in configuration from MULTINET:DECNET-CIRCUITS.COM]
DECNET-CONFIG>add
[Adding new configuration entry for DECnet circuit "TCP-0-3"]
Destination IP Address: 80.6.148.150
DECnet circuit cost: [1] 3
DECnet hello timer (in seconds): [300]
[TCP-0-3 => 213.123.127.24 (Cost=3, Hello Timer=300)]
DECNET-CONFIG>^Z
[Writing configuration to MULTINET:DECNET-CIRCUITS.COM]
$ reboot
Okay, done. Assuming that was the right IP, we'll see what
happens :)
Hmm nothing is showing up at my end. Doe you have a firewall blocking
port 700/udp ?
Though I think you said you already had multinet running to other nodes,
so that sounds unlikely.
Chrissie
On 27 Dec 2011, at 12:00, Chrissie Caulfield wrote:
$ multinet conf/decnet
MultiNet DECNET Circuit Configuration Utility V5.2(10)
[Reading in configuration from MULTINET:DECNET-CIRCUITS.COM]
DECNET-CONFIG>add
[Adding new configuration entry for DECnet circuit "TCP-0-3"]
Destination IP Address: 80.6.148.150
DECnet circuit cost: [1] 3
DECnet hello timer (in seconds): [300]
[TCP-0-3 => 213.123.127.24 (Cost=3, Hello Timer=300)]
DECNET-CONFIG>^Z
[Writing configuration to MULTINET:DECNET-CIRCUITS.COM]
$ reboot
Okay, done. Assuming that was the right IP, we'll see what
happens :)
--
Mark Benson
http://DECtec.info
Twitter: @DECtecInfo
HECnet: STAR69::MARK
Online Resource & Mailing List for DEC Enthusiasts.
On 27/12/2011 10:57, Mark Benson wrote:
On 27 Dec 2011, at 10:43, Chrissie Caulfield wrote:
So can you set up a multinet link to chrissie.homelinux.net (warning IP
address may change ... though it doesn't do it very often and Steve
Davidson can let you know when it does) and let me know your IP address
and I'll set up a multinet link here. That should do.
I honestly haven't the first clue how.
My IP is 213.123.127.24 if you want to set your end up.
It's pretty easy, just type the following on the VAX when logged in as SYSTEM (typing is in bold, if you can see that)
$ multinet conf/decnet
MultiNet DECNET Circuit Configuration Utility V5.2(10)
[Reading in configuration from MULTINET:DECNET-CIRCUITS.COM]
DECNET-CONFIG>add
[Adding new configuration entry for DECnet circuit "TCP-0-3"]
Destination IP Address: 80.6.148.150
DECnet circuit cost: [1] 3
DECnet hello timer (in seconds): [300]
[TCP-0-3 => 213.123.127.24 (Cost=3, Hello Timer=300)]
DECNET-CONFIG>^Z
[Writing configuration to MULTINET:DECNET-CIRCUITS.COM]
$ reboot
Chrissie
On 26/12/2011 18:39, Mark Benson wrote:
On 26 Dec 2011, at 16:00, Bob Armstrong wrote:
I assumed (perhaps stupidly) that as long as Chrissie's machines are
bridged onto HECnet somewhere using Johnny's bridge,
She's not using the bridge, though. ROOSTA has a multinet connection to
LEGATO (which I don't mind, but as Johnny said, isn't going to work).
Okay, well STAR69 has Multinet on it but as for tunnelling between them
I ain't got a clue, chief, and again I can't guarantee 100% uptime on the
link if it is opened.
So can you set up a multinet link to chrissie.homelinux.net (warning IP
address may change ... though it doesn't do it very often and Steve
Davidson can let you know when it does) and let me know your IP address
and I'll set up a multinet link here. That should do.
If it does down sometimes we'll just have to live with the consequences ;-)
Chrissie
Someone had "magic" to deal with changing adresses?
Sure I can set up a link, and I'll suggest metric 5..
The VAXen with multinet is 192.108.200.211.
-P
Isn't the problem similar to what happens if there would have been two active bridges between two ethernet segments?
------Origineel bericht------
Van: Peter Lothberg
Afzender: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Aan: hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Cc: hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Beantwoorden: hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Onderwerp: Re: [HECnet] ROOSTA routing problem
Verzonden: 27 december 2011 18:43
Hmmm.. LEGATO can't talk to ROOSTA ("remote node not currently reachable")
even though there's a direct Multinet link to ROOSTA (and yes, the link is
UP and working).
I think the problem is that ROOSTA is in area 6, and the area router for 6
is STAR69. Trouble is, STAR69 doesn't have a path to ROOSTA and doesn't
know how to send it packets.
(It doesn't help that STAR69 still thinks that ROOSTA is 3.34 - it moved
to 6.134 a while ago - but I don't think that's causing the problem.)
Multinet links metric 5
Bridged ethernet metric 10
Set all multinet-link nodes Level2-Area-Routers
--P
On 27 Dec 2011, at 10:43, Chrissie Caulfield wrote:
So can you set up a multinet link to chrissie.homelinux.net (warning IP
address may change ... though it doesn't do it very often and Steve
Davidson can let you know when it does) and let me know your IP address
and I'll set up a multinet link here. That should do.
I honestly haven't the first clue how.
My IP is 213.123.127.24 if you want to set your end up.
If it does down sometimes we'll just have to live with the consequences ;-)
You mean like when I woke up this morning to find my HP Microserver was off.
No idea why. I must live in the Twilight Zone... or I leant on the power button
yesterday.
Unless ROOSTA is an area router, that link makes no sense.
I won't argue with you about that... I can't fix it from here, though.
But does DECnet allow two different area routers, with different subsets of
reachable nodes, for the same area??
as long as ALL area routers in an area talks to eachother and the
transit nodes are all L2 area routers in the same area.
--P
Well that is a good summary Johnny.
The application are compatible, phone and sethost work well between nodes.
I think phase V maintains a lot more information so the management software might return error messages because the phase V node doesn't understand the incoming request. IIRC phase V nodes still have a small NCP database so that remote phase IV nodes can interrogate (a subset of) executor parameters.
Hans
-----Original Message-----
From: Johnny Billquist <bqt at softjar.se>
Sender: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Date: Tue, 27 Dec 2011 10:20:27
To: <hecnet at Update.UU.SE>
Reply-To: hecnet at Update.UU.SESubject: Re: [HECnet] ROOSTA routing problem / NIKKEL
On 2011-12-27 09.35, hvlems at zonnet.nl wrote:
That's what I meant :-) sorry for the obscure language. More precisely: phase IV has no clue about phase V. It is possible to get information from a phase IV node while running ncl.
I'll boot a phase IV area router this evening. Everything is shutdown right now except the bridge program.
Well, phase V is supposed to be backwards compatible with phase IV,
meaning a phase IV node can talk with a phase V node, as far as phase IV
functionality goes. NCP (and NCL, which I assume is the phase V tool for
manipulating things) are just the local tool. When you give commands
over the network, you talk a protocol called NICE, which is a known
object in DECnet. Phase IV or phase V shouldn't make a difference, since
the NICE protocol is still the same (or should be). It would appear the
made some incompatible change after all, which atleast makes RSX
machines not happy with the response from a NICE server on a phase V node.
Oh well... Not that important, I guess.
Johnny
-----Original Message-----
From: Johnny Billquist<bqt at softjar.se>
Sender: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Date: Tue, 27 Dec 2011 09:23:22
To:<hecnet at Update.UU.SE>
Reply-To: hecnet at Update.UU.SESubject: Re: [HECnet] ROOSTA routing problem / NIKKEL
On 2011-12-26 23.26, H Vlems wrote:
Could that be ncl talking back to your ncp?
Not sure what you mean by that.
But the fact that it's a phase V node might be the reason. Slightly
incompatible with phase IV sometimes...
Johnny
-----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
Van: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE [mailto:owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE] Namens
Johnny Billquist
Verzonden: maandag, december 2011 22:29
Aan: hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Onderwerp: Re: [HECnet] ROOSTA routing problem / NIKKEL
On 2011-12-26 18.46, H Vlems wrote:
Johnny, what is wrong with NIKKEL as seen from your end?
Sorry. I should really have told that one...
.ncp tell nikkel sho exec
NCP -- Show failed, oversized Management command message
Johnny
Hans
PS Ni is a phase V decnet node
-----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
Van: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE [mailto:owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE] Namens
Johnny Billquist
Verzonden: maandag, december 2011 15:37
Aan: hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Onderwerp: Re: [HECnet] ROOSTA routing problem
On 2011-12-26 15.24, Johnny Billquist wrote:
On 2011-12-26 15.07, Bob Armstrong wrote:
Hmmm.. LEGATO can't talk to ROOSTA ("remote node not currently
reachable") even though there's a direct Multinet link to ROOSTA (and
yes, the link is UP and working).
I think the problem is that ROOSTA is in area 6, and the area router for
6 is STAR69. Trouble is, STAR69 doesn't have a path to ROOSTA and
doesn't know how to send it packets.
Unless ROOSTA is an area router, that link makes no sense. You cannot
have (usable) links between different areas unless both ends are area
routers...
It would appear something is more broken currently. I can't talk to SG1
from MIM either, and thus nothing beyond it. And SG1 is currently acting
as the next hop for a whole bunch of areas, as seen from area 1.
Also, while I'm at it: NIKKEL - There is some issue with that machine
too. Can others talk with it?
Johnny
Hmmm.. LEGATO can't talk to ROOSTA ("remote node not currently reachable")
even though there's a direct Multinet link to ROOSTA (and yes, the link is
UP and working).
I think the problem is that ROOSTA is in area 6, and the area router for 6
is STAR69. Trouble is, STAR69 doesn't have a path to ROOSTA and doesn't
know how to send it packets.
(It doesn't help that STAR69 still thinks that ROOSTA is 3.34 - it moved
to 6.134 a while ago - but I don't think that's causing the problem.)
Multinet links metric 5
Bridged ethernet metric 10
Set all multinet-link nodes Level2-Area-Routers
--P
On 26/12/2011 18:39, Mark Benson wrote:
On 26 Dec 2011, at 16:00, Bob Armstrong wrote:
I assumed (perhaps stupidly) that as long as Chrissie's machines are
bridged onto HECnet somewhere using Johnny's bridge,
She's not using the bridge, though. ROOSTA has a multinet connection to
LEGATO (which I don't mind, but as Johnny said, isn't going to work).
Okay, well STAR69 has Multinet on it but as for tunnelling between them
I ain't got a clue, chief, and again I can't guarantee 100% uptime on the
link if it is opened.
So can you set up a multinet link to chrissie.homelinux.net (warning IP
address may change ... though it doesn't do it very often and Steve
Davidson can let you know when it does) and let me know your IP address
and I'll set up a multinet link here. That should do.
If it does down sometimes we'll just have to live with the consequences ;-)
Chrissie
On 2011-12-27 09.35, hvlems at zonnet.nl wrote:
That's what I meant :-) sorry for the obscure language. More precisely: phase IV has no clue about phase V. It is possible to get information from a phase IV node while running ncl.
I'll boot a phase IV area router this evening. Everything is shutdown right now except the bridge program.
Well, phase V is supposed to be backwards compatible with phase IV, meaning a phase IV node can talk with a phase V node, as far as phase IV functionality goes. NCP (and NCL, which I assume is the phase V tool for manipulating things) are just the local tool. When you give commands over the network, you talk a protocol called NICE, which is a known object in DECnet. Phase IV or phase V shouldn't make a difference, since the NICE protocol is still the same (or should be). It would appear the made some incompatible change after all, which atleast makes RSX machines not happy with the response from a NICE server on a phase V node.
Oh well... Not that important, I guess.
Johnny
-----Original Message-----
From: Johnny Billquist<bqt at softjar.se>
Sender: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Date: Tue, 27 Dec 2011 09:23:22
To:<hecnet at Update.UU.SE>
Reply-To: hecnet at Update.UU.SESubject: Re: [HECnet] ROOSTA routing problem / NIKKEL
On 2011-12-26 23.26, H Vlems wrote:
Could that be ncl talking back to your ncp?
Not sure what you mean by that.
But the fact that it's a phase V node might be the reason. Slightly
incompatible with phase IV sometimes...
Johnny
-----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
Van: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE [mailto:owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE] Namens
Johnny Billquist
Verzonden: maandag, december 2011 22:29
Aan: hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Onderwerp: Re: [HECnet] ROOSTA routing problem / NIKKEL
On 2011-12-26 18.46, H Vlems wrote:
Johnny, what is wrong with NIKKEL as seen from your end?
Sorry. I should really have told that one...
.ncp tell nikkel sho exec
NCP -- Show failed, oversized Management command message
Johnny
Hans
PS Ni is a phase V decnet node
-----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
Van: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE [mailto:owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE] Namens
Johnny Billquist
Verzonden: maandag, december 2011 15:37
Aan: hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Onderwerp: Re: [HECnet] ROOSTA routing problem
On 2011-12-26 15.24, Johnny Billquist wrote:
On 2011-12-26 15.07, Bob Armstrong wrote:
Hmmm.. LEGATO can't talk to ROOSTA ("remote node not currently
reachable") even though there's a direct Multinet link to ROOSTA (and
yes, the link is UP and working).
I think the problem is that ROOSTA is in area 6, and the area router for
6 is STAR69. Trouble is, STAR69 doesn't have a path to ROOSTA and
doesn't know how to send it packets.
Unless ROOSTA is an area router, that link makes no sense. You cannot
have (usable) links between different areas unless both ends are area
routers...
It would appear something is more broken currently. I can't talk to SG1
from MIM either, and thus nothing beyond it. And SG1 is currently acting
as the next hop for a whole bunch of areas, as seen from area 1.
Also, while I'm at it: NIKKEL - There is some issue with that machine
too. Can others talk with it?
Johnny
That's what I meant :-) sorry for the obscure language. More precisely: phase IV has no clue about phase V. It is possible to get information from a phase IV node while running ncl.
I'll boot a phase IV area router this evening. Everything is shutdown right now except the bridge program.
-----Original Message-----
From: Johnny Billquist <bqt at softjar.se>
Sender: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Date: Tue, 27 Dec 2011 09:23:22
To: <hecnet at Update.UU.SE>
Reply-To: hecnet at Update.UU.SESubject: Re: [HECnet] ROOSTA routing problem / NIKKEL
On 2011-12-26 23.26, H Vlems wrote:
Could that be ncl talking back to your ncp?
Not sure what you mean by that.
But the fact that it's a phase V node might be the reason. Slightly
incompatible with phase IV sometimes...
Johnny
-----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
Van: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE [mailto:owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE] Namens
Johnny Billquist
Verzonden: maandag, december 2011 22:29
Aan: hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Onderwerp: Re: [HECnet] ROOSTA routing problem / NIKKEL
On 2011-12-26 18.46, H Vlems wrote:
Johnny, what is wrong with NIKKEL as seen from your end?
Sorry. I should really have told that one...
.ncp tell nikkel sho exec
NCP -- Show failed, oversized Management command message
Johnny
Hans
PS Ni is a phase V decnet node
-----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
Van: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE [mailto:owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE] Namens
Johnny Billquist
Verzonden: maandag, december 2011 15:37
Aan: hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Onderwerp: Re: [HECnet] ROOSTA routing problem
On 2011-12-26 15.24, Johnny Billquist wrote:
On 2011-12-26 15.07, Bob Armstrong wrote:
Hmmm.. LEGATO can't talk to ROOSTA ("remote node not currently
reachable") even though there's a direct Multinet link to ROOSTA (and
yes, the link is UP and working).
I think the problem is that ROOSTA is in area 6, and the area router for
6 is STAR69. Trouble is, STAR69 doesn't have a path to ROOSTA and
doesn't know how to send it packets.
Unless ROOSTA is an area router, that link makes no sense. You cannot
have (usable) links between different areas unless both ends are area
routers...
It would appear something is more broken currently. I can't talk to SG1
from MIM either, and thus nothing beyond it. And SG1 is currently acting
as the next hop for a whole bunch of areas, as seen from area 1.
Also, while I'm at it: NIKKEL - There is some issue with that machine
too. Can others talk with it?
Johnny
On 2011-12-26 23.26, H Vlems wrote:
Could that be ncl talking back to your ncp?
Not sure what you mean by that.
But the fact that it's a phase V node might be the reason. Slightly incompatible with phase IV sometimes...
Johnny
-----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
Van: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE [mailto:owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE] Namens
Johnny Billquist
Verzonden: maandag, december 2011 22:29
Aan: hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Onderwerp: Re: [HECnet] ROOSTA routing problem / NIKKEL
On 2011-12-26 18.46, H Vlems wrote:
Johnny, what is wrong with NIKKEL as seen from your end?
Sorry. I should really have told that one...
.ncp tell nikkel sho exec
NCP -- Show failed, oversized Management command message
Johnny
Hans
PS Ni is a phase V decnet node
-----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
Van: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE [mailto:owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE] Namens
Johnny Billquist
Verzonden: maandag, december 2011 15:37
Aan: hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Onderwerp: Re: [HECnet] ROOSTA routing problem
On 2011-12-26 15.24, Johnny Billquist wrote:
On 2011-12-26 15.07, Bob Armstrong wrote:
Hmmm.. LEGATO can't talk to ROOSTA ("remote node not currently
reachable") even though there's a direct Multinet link to ROOSTA (and
yes, the link is UP and working).
I think the problem is that ROOSTA is in area 6, and the area router for
6 is STAR69. Trouble is, STAR69 doesn't have a path to ROOSTA and
doesn't know how to send it packets.
Unless ROOSTA is an area router, that link makes no sense. You cannot
have (usable) links between different areas unless both ends are area
routers...
It would appear something is more broken currently. I can't talk to SG1
from MIM either, and thus nothing beyond it. And SG1 is currently acting
as the next hop for a whole bunch of areas, as seen from area 1.
Also, while I'm at it: NIKKEL - There is some issue with that machine
too. Can others talk with it?
Johnny
