Does the emulator come with an OS?
What I actually mean is: it available for hobbyists?
Verzonden vanaf mijn draadloze BlackBerry -toestel
-----Original Message-----
From: Paul Koning <paul_koning at dell.com>
Sender: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2011 11:13:00
To: <hecnet at Update.UU.SE>
Reply-To: hecnet at Update.UU.SESubject: Re: [HECnet] Towards the Mouth of Madness....
Yes, 60 bits one's complement, oddball floating point format, 12 bit one's complement I/O processors...
Your memory is quite good. That's just how it works, in all the various OSs I know.
BTW, there exists an emulator -- DtCyber ("Desktop Cyber").
paul
On Jul 13, 2011, at 11:08 AM, <hvlems at zonnet.nl> wrote:
A CDC 6000 no less, that's a 60 bit architecture right?
SCOPE (?) is somewhat arcane though. I remember entering an Algol program and then compiled it. Somebody asked a question and having forgotten what I'd done, tried to compile again. The OS said:
No such file or at end of file.
The user had to type the REWIND command. The compiler could then read the sourcefile again :-)
------Origineel bericht------
Van: Paul Koning
Afzender: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Aan: hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Beantwoorden: hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Onderwerp: Re: [HECnet] Towards the Mouth of Madness....
Verzonden: 13 juli 2011 16:52
On Jul 13, 2011, at 9:39 AM, <hvlems at zonnet.nl> wrote:
Ah, so that's your specification for an interesting system: weird with DECnet :-)
Apart from the DECnet requirement, if you want weird I don't think you can top a CDC 6000 series machine. The size can be a bit problematic, I suppose.
My dream (about 10% complete) is to build a replica in an FPGA. I have the schematics to do it, it's just a whole lot of work...
paul
Verzonden vanaf mijn draadloze BlackBerry -toestel
Yes, 60 bits one's complement, oddball floating point format, 12 bit one's complement I/O processors...
Your memory is quite good. That's just how it works, in all the various OSs I know.
BTW, there exists an emulator -- DtCyber ("Desktop Cyber").
paul
On Jul 13, 2011, at 11:08 AM, <hvlems at zonnet.nl> wrote:
A CDC 6000 no less, that's a 60 bit architecture right?
SCOPE (?) is somewhat arcane though. I remember entering an Algol program and then compiled it. Somebody asked a question and having forgotten what I'd done, tried to compile again. The OS said:
No such file or at end of file.
The user had to type the REWIND command. The compiler could then read the sourcefile again :-)
------Origineel bericht------
Van: Paul Koning
Afzender: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Aan: hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Beantwoorden: hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Onderwerp: Re: [HECnet] Towards the Mouth of Madness....
Verzonden: 13 juli 2011 16:52
On Jul 13, 2011, at 9:39 AM, <hvlems at zonnet.nl> wrote:
Ah, so that's your specification for an interesting system: weird with DECnet :-)
Apart from the DECnet requirement, if you want weird I don't think you can top a CDC 6000 series machine. The size can be a bit problematic, I suppose.
My dream (about 10% complete) is to build a replica in an FPGA. I have the schematics to do it, it's just a whole lot of work...
paul
Verzonden vanaf mijn draadloze BlackBerry -toestel
A CDC 6000 no less, that's a 60 bit architecture right?
SCOPE (?) is somewhat arcane though. I remember entering an Algol program and then compiled it. Somebody asked a question and having forgotten what I'd done, tried to compile again. The OS said:
No such file or at end of file.
The user had to type the REWIND command. The compiler could then read the sourcefile again :-)
------Origineel bericht------
Van: Paul Koning
Afzender: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Aan: hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Beantwoorden: hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Onderwerp: Re: [HECnet] Towards the Mouth of Madness....
Verzonden: 13 juli 2011 16:52
On Jul 13, 2011, at 9:39 AM, <hvlems at zonnet.nl> wrote:
Ah, so that's your specification for an interesting system: weird with DECnet :-)
Apart from the DECnet requirement, if you want weird I don't think you can top a CDC 6000 series machine. The size can be a bit problematic, I suppose.
My dream (about 10% complete) is to build a replica in an FPGA. I have the schematics to do it, it's just a whole lot of work...
paul
Verzonden vanaf mijn draadloze BlackBerry -toestel
On Jul 13, 2011, at 9:39 AM, <hvlems at zonnet.nl> wrote:
Ah, so that's your specification for an interesting system: weird with DECnet :-)
Apart from the DECnet requirement, if you want weird I don't think you can top a CDC 6000 series machine. The size can be a bit problematic, I suppose.
My dream (about 10% complete) is to build a replica in an FPGA. I have the schematics to do it, it's just a whole lot of work...
paul
On 13 Jul 2011, at 15:00, Brian Hechinger <wonko at 4amlunch.net> wrote:
AIX / random Unix box, whereas the AS/400 is WEIRD.
I like weird.
Technically AIX isn't just a "random unix box" it's weird with a POSIX layer on top. :-D
Definitely not as weird as an AS/400 though
Depends how you look at it. Some RS/6000 gear is weird hardware wise and AIX is certainly interesting as UNIX systems go (in the Chinese sense mostly). It's more sort if interspersed layers of IBM weirdness and UNIX compliance sorta knitted into a funky tank top ;)
--
Mark Benson
http://markbenson.org/bloghttp://twitter.com/MDBenson
On 7/12/2011 4:04 PM, Mark Benson wrote:
It wasn't until 95 with Microsoft including TCP/IP into the consumer OS did it really start to matter.
Yes I do remember the days when Windows 3.11 had Winsock to provide a separate TCP stack. We used it and SLIP to dial up to our ISP back then. We had to keep a Windows 3.1 box on the modem for quite a while until we worked out how to build SLIP dialup scripts for Windows 95.
Sometimes I swear I was born 10 years too late :(
When I first started working at PSU our PC lab was a bunch of IBM PS/2 machines connected to Token Ring running DOS and the TCP/IP shim stuff. It was weird and a giant pain in the ass to say the least.
The Unix/DEC hardware was sooooooooooo much easier to manage. :-D
-brian
On 7/12/2011 5:38 PM, Paul Koning wrote:
On Jul 12, 2011, at 5:29 PM,<hvlems at zonnet.nl> <hvlems at zonnet.nl> wrote:
It took HP until 2006 to replace the FDDI lan with ethernet technolgy. The fault tolerance of FDDI and the build quality of DEC's gigaswitch products.
The bandwidth of FDDI is a lot better than fast ethernet.
Not true, not unless the implementation is crummy. Any halfway decent fast Ethernet host will run at wire speed, and the difference between 1500 and 4460 MTU isn't enough to amount to very much.
Except for the fact that on ethernet you took the framing hit to your speed (100Mbps link level) and with FDDI the framing was done outside of your "speed" (125Mbps link level, true 100Mbps data).
-brian
On 7/13/2011 7:05 AM, Sampsa Laine wrote:
On 12 Jul 2011, at 21:34, Mark Benson wrote:
Don't buy an AS400. Buy an RS/6000 - you can pick up a decent one for anywhere between 50GBP and 5000 GBP :D
The RS/6000 is just a AIX / random Unix box, whereas the AS/400 is WEIRD.
I like weird.
Technically AIX isn't just a "random unix box" it's weird with a POSIX layer on top. :-D
Definitely not as weird as an AS/400 though.
-brian
Hear hear, well put indeed :)
Verzonden vanaf mijn draadloze BlackBerry -toestel
-----Original Message-----
From: Mark Benson <md.benson at gmail.com>
Sender: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2011 12:27:23
To: hecnet at Update.UU.SE<hecnet at Update.UU.SE>
Reply-To: hecnet at Update.UU.SESubject: Re: [HECnet] Towards the Mouth of Madness....
Ah, so that's your specification for an interesting system: weird with DECnet :-)
The AS/400 is a nice choice then . 48 bit architecture, was supposed to replace the S/38 (it's code compatible with it) and be a VAX killer at the same time.
Which obviously didn't work since every home has a VAX now as Johnny tells us repeatedly (or did I get something wrong ;-)
Anyway, I've configured the IP stack on one of them, 10 years ago and what I remember is this.
It follows the IBM way of doing things : nearly everything is menu driven. A system manager hardly ever types commands, he just fills in forms. The result ends up in a file which gets compiled or assembled with a bunch of others. AIX has something similar called SMIT (if my memry serves me well).
Well, I prefer to type my own commands and DCL scripts.
I'd like to get a small Unisys (n e Burroughs) A4 though.
Hans
Verzonden vanaf mijn draadloze BlackBerry -toestel
-----Original Message-----
From: Sampsa Laine <sampsa at mac.com>
Sender: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2011 12:05:48
To: <hecnet at Update.UU.SE>
Reply-To: hecnet at Update.UU.SESubject: Re: [HECnet] Towards the Mouth of Madness....
On 12 Jul 2011, at 21:34, Mark Benson wrote:
Don't buy an AS400. Buy an RS/6000 - you can pick up a decent one for anywhere between 50GBP and 5000 GBP :D
The RS/6000 is just a AIX / random Unix box, whereas the AS/400 is WEIRD.
I like weird.
Sampsa
On 2011-07-13 02.44, MG wrote:
On 12-7-2011 23:44, Johnny Billquist wrote:
So, yes, there are people around... Like I said - not everyone on this
list is even running a VMS system...
Johnny
What do you mean by that?
Just that the discussions lately seems to have started assuming that everyone is running VMS. :-)
But I know that most people know that this is not true. I just felt like pointing it out. Not trying to offend anyone.
Johnny
Joe, have a look at the simh site: there used to be a collection of tape images for TOPS 10 and 20.
Verzonden vanaf mijn draadloze BlackBerry -toestel
From: Joe Ferraro <jferraro at gmail.com>
Sender: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2011 19:33:36 -0400
To: <hecnet at update.uu.se>
ReplyTo: hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Subject: Re: [HECnet] Towards the Mouth of Madness....
Thanks guys... also checking out alt.sys.pdp10 - I'd gotten tapes at work a while back, then started messing with the Panda distribution. I may just try to bring it up from tape and try my luck once again.
Thanks again!
Joe
On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 7:29 PM, Bob Armstrong <bob at jfcl.com> wrote:
<Pray tell - who owns area 59? Sampsa?
Peter Lothberg
Bob Armstrong
On 2011-07-13 01:14, Joe Ferraro wrote:
Pray tell - who owns area 59? Sampsa?
Nope. The information can be found at MIM::US:[DECNET], but I can tell you it is someone called Peter L thberg. Don't know if you know about him, though. But he knows pretty much all there is to know about PDP-10s.
On 12-7-2011 23:44, Johnny Billquist wrote:
So, yes, there are people around... Like I said - not everyone on this list is even running a VMS system...
Johnny
What do you mean by that?
- MG
Thanks guys... also checking out alt.sys.pdp10 - I'd gotten tapes at work a while back, then started messing with the Panda distribution. I may just try to bring it up from tape and try my luck once again.
Thanks again!
Joe
On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 7:29 PM, Bob Armstrong <bob at jfcl.com> wrote:
<Pray tell - who owns area 59? Sampsa?
Peter Lothberg
Bob Armstrong
On 2011-07-13 01:14, Joe Ferraro wrote:
Pray tell - who owns area 59? Sampsa?
Nope. The information can be found at MIM::US:[DECNET], but I can tell you it is someone called Peter L thberg. Don't know if you know about him, though. But he knows pretty much all there is to know about PDP-10s.
On 2011-07-13 01:14, Joe Ferraro wrote:
Pray tell - who owns area 59? Sampsa?
Nope. The information can be found at MIM::US:[DECNET], but I can tell you it is someone called Peter L thberg. Don't know if you know about him, though. But he knows pretty much all there is to know about PDP-10s.
Johnny
On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 5:44 PM, Johnny Billquist <bqt at softjar.se
<mailto:bqt at softjar.se>> wrote:
On 2011-07-12 23:14, Joe Ferraro wrote:
While we are on the topic, does anyone have any experience with
TOPS-20
/ DECNET? I've haven't had time to mess with it of late, but I was
unsuccessful in a previous evening's attempt or two.
Well, doh...! :-)
.ncp tell sol sho exec cha
Node characteristics as of 12-JUL-11 23:38:44
Executor node = 59.10 (SOL)
Identification = Systems Concepts SF CA USA - SC30M - DN-20 4.0,
Management v
ersion = 4.0.0
Loop count = 1, Loop length = 127
Loop with = Mixed, Incoming timer = 30
Outgoing timer = 60, NSP version = 4.0.0
Maximum links = 65535, Delay factor = 48
Delay weight = 10
Inactivity timer = 120, Retransmit factor = 10
Routing version = 2.0.0, Type = Routing IV
Routing timer = 600
Broadcast routing timer = 40, Maximum address = 1023
Maximum circuits = 20
Maximum cost = 100
Maximum hops = 16, Maximum visits = 20
Maximum broadcast endnodes = 64
Maximum broadcast routers = 32
Maximum buffers = 80, Buffer size = 576
Segment buffer size = 576
--
Johnny Billquist || "I'm on a bus
|| on a psychedelic trip
email: bqt at softjar.se || Reading murder books
pdp is alive! || tryin' to stay hip" - B. Idol
Pray tell - who owns area 59? Sampsa?
On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 5:44 PM, Johnny Billquist <bqt at softjar.se> wrote:
On 2011-07-12 23:14, Joe Ferraro wrote:
While we are on the topic, does anyone have any experience with TOPS-20
/ DECNET? I've haven't had time to mess with it of late, but I was
unsuccessful in a previous evening's attempt or two.
Well, doh...! :-)
.ncp tell sol sho exec cha
Node characteristics as of 12-JUL-11 23:38:44
Executor node = 59.10 (SOL)
Identification = Systems Concepts SF CA USA - SC30M - DN-20 4.0, Management v
ersion = 4.0.0
Loop count = 1, Loop length = 127
Loop with = Mixed, Incoming timer = 30
Outgoing timer = 60, NSP version = 4.0.0
Maximum links = 65535, Delay factor = 48
Delay weight = 10
Inactivity timer = 120, Retransmit factor = 10
Routing version = 2.0.0, Type = Routing IV
Routing timer = 600
Broadcast routing timer = 40, Maximum address = 1023
Maximum circuits = 20
Maximum cost = 100
Maximum hops = 16, Maximum visits = 20
Maximum broadcast endnodes = 64
Maximum broadcast routers = 32
Maximum buffers = 80, Buffer size = 576
Segment buffer size = 576
Well, I had written that I considered 100VG a joke but decided not to send that :-). But - agree with you on that.
------Origineel bericht------
Van: Paul Koning
Afzender: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Aan: hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Beantwoorden: hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Onderwerp: Re: [HECnet] Towards the Mouth of Madness....
Verzonden: 12 juli 2011 23:49
You're right, FDDI predated 100BaseT by a little. Not by a whole lot.
100BaseVG was always a joke.
paul
On Jul 12, 2011, at 5:44 PM, <hvlems at zonnet.nl> wrote:
Paul. In 1991 there was no fast ethernet as we know it today. Ethernet over glassfiber was proprietary and by and large restricted to 10 Mb/s.
The problems with the redesign had tot do with emulating FDDI's built in redundancy with ethernet.
------Origineel bericht------
Van: Paul Koning
Afzender: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Aan: hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Beantwoorden: hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Onderwerp: Re: [HECnet] Towards the Mouth of Madness....
Verzonden: 12 juli 2011 23:38
On Jul 12, 2011, at 5:29 PM, <hvlems at zonnet.nl> <hvlems at zonnet.nl> wrote:
It took HP until 2006 to replace the FDDI lan with ethernet technolgy. The fault tolerance of FDDI and the build quality of DEC's gigaswitch products.
The bandwidth of FDDI is a lot better than fast ethernet.
Not true, not unless the implementation is crummy. Any halfway decent fast Ethernet host will run at wire speed, and the difference between 1500 and 4460 MTU isn't enough to amount to very much.
paul
Verzonden vanaf mijn draadloze BlackBerry -toestel
Verzonden vanaf mijn draadloze BlackBerry -toestel
real network switches, and faster computer buses certainly helped there too.... Then there was that 'PC in the server room' thing that happened.... It was insane they'd sell 100Mbit cards on buses that could barely go above 10 or 33mbit.
2011/7/12 Kari Uusim ki <uusimaki at exdecfinland.org>
Yes, absolutely! The bandwith was 98% of the nominal value. Ethernet starts diminshing after 60%.
I did extensive testing of FDDI back in early -90's and put as much load on it as I could with about a dozen Alphas of the time and found out that it easily outperformed Ethernet.
FDDI gear were more expensive than Ethernet, but were more useful.
FDDI was really outperformed by GbE as the multiplexed 100Mbit/s wasn't available on so many platforms.
Kari
On 13.7.2011 0:29, hvlems at zonnet.nl wrote:
It took HP until 2006 to replace the FDDI lan with ethernet technolgy.
The fault tolerance of FDDI and the build quality of DEC's gigaswitch
products.
The bandwidth of FDDI is a lot better than fast ethernet.
Hans
Verzonden vanaf mijn draadloze BlackBerry -toestel
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*From: * Joe Ferraro <jferraro at gmail.com>
*Sender: * owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE
*Date: *Tue, 12 Jul 2011 17:12:02 -0400
*To: *<hecnet at update.uu.se>
*ReplyTo: * hecnet at Update.UU.SE
*Subject: *Re: [HECnet] Towards the Mouth of Madness....
Off topic... I received a page, a few weeks prior, on a machine that was
not pinging. Turns out, it was one of a few old NOVA class boxes we
still have at my work, using FDDI for connectivity. Fortunately, a
disconnect / reconnect brought the ring back online; I was scared (and a
bit excited in a strange way) for a few moments that I was going to have
to do some extensive troubleshooting... FDDI still lives.
On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 4:27 PM, H Vlems <hvlems at zonnet.nl
<mailto:hvlems at zonnet.nl>> wrote:
__
Remember what I wrote: this happened nearly two decades ago.____
IP is the protocol that survived and most people aren t even aware
what happened on local area networks before, say,1998.____
I worked for Fuji, photosensitive films, paper and offset printing
products.____
Most of the IT equipment was made by DEC: PDP-11 s (/44, /84, /93,
/24, /73 and /23), VAXes, an IBM mainframe (4081) and PC s.____
And lots of other gear, most of it in the research lab. A Motorola
box that ran Motorola Unix, and an RS/6000 under AIX 2.4 (?).____
The lingua franca was DECnet and LAT. No IP, though some PC s used
Novell and SNA over tokenring to make terminal emulation to the
mainframe possible.____
No IP. Sounds weird in today s world but DECnet eventually
connected everything. We got a **very** early Cisco router that did
level 1____
DECnet routing between the corporate ethernet and the finance dept
token ring. Another (DEC) box that routed DECnet over Datanet/1
(that s X25 in Europe IIRC). The mainframe used an SNA/DECnet
gateway (the big channel attached box).____
The RS/6000 and the Motorola systems also ran DECnet, endnode only.____
To make this a little interesting we ran the first FDDI network in
the Netherlands.____
Trouble shooting wasn t always easy, especially if the SNA/DECnet
gateway was involved!____
Hans____
__ __
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Van:*owner-__hecnet at Update.UU.SE <mailto:hecnet at Update.UU.SE>__
[mailto:owner- <mailto:owner->__hecnet at Update.UU.SE
<mailto:hecnet at Update.UU.SE>__] *Namens *Jason Stevens
*Verzonden:* dinsdag, juli 2011 21:10
*Aan:* hecnet at update.uu.se <mailto:hecnet at update.uu.se>
*Onderwerp:* Re: [HECnet] Towards the Mouth of Madness....____
__ __
AIX and decnet? now that'd be ... non conformist & fun! ____
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Geen virus gevonden in dit bericht.
Gecontroleerd door AVG - www.avg.com <http://www.avg.com>
Versie: 10.0.1388 / Virusdatabase: 1516/3760 - datum van uitgifte:
07/12/11____
Ok, true if you're talking half duplex with multiple active nodes.
paul
On Jul 12, 2011, at 5:47 PM, Kari Uusim ki wrote:
Yes, absolutely! The bandwith was 98% of the nominal value. Ethernet starts diminshing after 60%.
I did extensive testing of FDDI back in early -90's and put as much load on it as I could with about a dozen Alphas of the time and found out that it easily outperformed Ethernet.
FDDI gear were more expensive than Ethernet, but were more useful.
FDDI was really outperformed by GbE as the multiplexed 100Mbit/s wasn't available on so many platforms.
Kari
On 13.7.2011 0:29, hvlems at zonnet.nl wrote:
It took HP until 2006 to replace the FDDI lan with ethernet technolgy.
The fault tolerance of FDDI and the build quality of DEC's gigaswitch
products.
The bandwidth of FDDI is a lot better than fast ethernet.
Hans
Verzonden vanaf mijn draadloze BlackBerry -toestel
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*From: * Joe Ferraro <jferraro at gmail.com>
*Sender: * owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE
*Date: *Tue, 12 Jul 2011 17:12:02 -0400
*To: *<hecnet at update.uu.se>
*ReplyTo: * hecnet at Update.UU.SE
*Subject: *Re: [HECnet] Towards the Mouth of Madness....
Off topic... I received a page, a few weeks prior, on a machine that was
not pinging. Turns out, it was one of a few old NOVA class boxes we
still have at my work, using FDDI for connectivity. Fortunately, a
disconnect / reconnect brought the ring back online; I was scared (and a
bit excited in a strange way) for a few moments that I was going to have
to do some extensive troubleshooting... FDDI still lives.
On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 4:27 PM, H Vlems <hvlems at zonnet.nl
<mailto:hvlems at zonnet.nl>> wrote:
__
Remember what I wrote: this happened nearly two decades ago.____
IP is the protocol that survived and most people aren t even aware
what happened on local area networks before, say,1998.____
I worked for Fuji, photosensitive films, paper and offset printing
products.____
Most of the IT equipment was made by DEC: PDP-11 s (/44, /84, /93,
/24, /73 and /23), VAXes, an IBM mainframe (4081) and PC s.____
And lots of other gear, most of it in the research lab. A Motorola
box that ran Motorola Unix, and an RS/6000 under AIX 2.4 (?).____
The lingua franca was DECnet and LAT. No IP, though some PC s used
Novell and SNA over tokenring to make terminal emulation to the
mainframe possible.____
No IP. Sounds weird in today s world but DECnet eventually
connected everything. We got a **very** early Cisco router that did
level 1____
DECnet routing between the corporate ethernet and the finance dept
token ring. Another (DEC) box that routed DECnet over Datanet/1
(that s X25 in Europe IIRC). The mainframe used an SNA/DECnet
gateway (the big channel attached box).____
The RS/6000 and the Motorola systems also ran DECnet, endnode only.____
To make this a little interesting we ran the first FDDI network in
the Netherlands.____
Trouble shooting wasn t always easy, especially if the SNA/DECnet
gateway was involved!____
Hans____
__ __
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Van:*owner-__hecnet at Update.UU.SE <mailto:hecnet at Update.UU.SE>__
[mailto:owner- <mailto:owner->__hecnet at Update.UU.SE
<mailto:hecnet at Update.UU.SE>__] *Namens *Jason Stevens
*Verzonden:* dinsdag, juli 2011 21:10
*Aan:* hecnet at update.uu.se <mailto:hecnet at update.uu.se>
*Onderwerp:* Re: [HECnet] Towards the Mouth of Madness....____
__ __
AIX and decnet? now that'd be ... non conformist & fun! ____
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Geen virus gevonden in dit bericht.
Gecontroleerd door AVG - www.avg.com <http://www.avg.com>
Versie: 10.0.1388 / Virusdatabase: 1516/3760 - datum van uitgifte:
07/12/11____
On 2011-07-12 23:11, Mark Benson wrote:
On 12 Jul 2011, at 21:48, hvlems at zonnet.nl wrote:
DECnet/AIX was a 3rd party effort IIRC
I haven't searched the internet yet but who knows what is available.
Perhaps the opensource decnet kit may be portable.
I know there's a DECNet kit for Linux out there somewhere. Not sure about anything else. Nothing crops up on a quick Google search that isn't dated early 90s.
There are Linux nodes on HECnet.
As for other implementations I know of...
SunOS had one. Probably never ported to Solaris, though.
Symbolics had one for GENERA (Lisp machines).
Cisco can probably still sell you a DECnet capable router, if you talk to them.
MS-DOS as well as Windows can talk DECnet (I used to have a WinXP machine on HECnet - Josse (1.17), but that machine is in Sweden, and I'm in Switzerland now).
I'm sure there are other implementations as well.
Johnny
--
Johnny Billquist || "I'm on a bus
|| on a psychedelic trip
email: bqt at softjar.se || Reading murder books
pdp is alive! || tryin' to stay hip" - B. Idol
You're right, FDDI predated 100BaseT by a little. Not by a whole lot.
100BaseVG was always a joke.
paul
On Jul 12, 2011, at 5:44 PM, <hvlems at zonnet.nl> wrote:
Paul. In 1991 there was no fast ethernet as we know it today. Ethernet over glassfiber was proprietary and by and large restricted to 10 Mb/s.
The problems with the redesign had tot do with emulating FDDI's built in redundancy with ethernet.
------Origineel bericht------
Van: Paul Koning
Afzender: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Aan: hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Beantwoorden: hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Onderwerp: Re: [HECnet] Towards the Mouth of Madness....
Verzonden: 12 juli 2011 23:38
On Jul 12, 2011, at 5:29 PM, <hvlems at zonnet.nl> <hvlems at zonnet.nl> wrote:
It took HP until 2006 to replace the FDDI lan with ethernet technolgy. The fault tolerance of FDDI and the build quality of DEC's gigaswitch products.
The bandwidth of FDDI is a lot better than fast ethernet.
Not true, not unless the implementation is crummy. Any halfway decent fast Ethernet host will run at wire speed, and the difference between 1500 and 4460 MTU isn't enough to amount to very much.
paul
Verzonden vanaf mijn draadloze BlackBerry -toestel
In 2005 speed wasn't the problem but redundancy was difficult to design in ethernet. I'm not a tokenring fan but the relianility of FDD- was impressive.
Verzonden vanaf mijn draadloze BlackBerry -toestel
From: Jason Stevens <neozeed at gmail.com>
Sender: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2011 17:39:45 -0400
To: <hecnet at update.uu.se>
ReplyTo: hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Subject: Re: [HECnet] Towards the Mouth of Madness....
I thought all the new ethernet stuff does jumbo frames for those that like that kind of thing anyways....
Not true, not unless the implementation is crummy. Any halfway decent fast Ethernet host will run at wire speed, and the difference between 1500 and 4460 MTU isn't enough to amount to very much.
paul
Yes, absolutely! The bandwith was 98% of the nominal value. Ethernet starts diminshing after 60%.
I did extensive testing of FDDI back in early -90's and put as much load on it as I could with about a dozen Alphas of the time and found out that it easily outperformed Ethernet.
FDDI gear were more expensive than Ethernet, but were more useful.
FDDI was really outperformed by GbE as the multiplexed 100Mbit/s wasn't available on so many platforms.
Kari
On 13.7.2011 0:29, hvlems at zonnet.nl wrote:
It took HP until 2006 to replace the FDDI lan with ethernet technolgy.
The fault tolerance of FDDI and the build quality of DEC's gigaswitch
products.
The bandwidth of FDDI is a lot better than fast ethernet.
Hans
Verzonden vanaf mijn draadloze BlackBerry -toestel
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*From: * Joe Ferraro <jferraro at gmail.com>
*Sender: * owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE
*Date: *Tue, 12 Jul 2011 17:12:02 -0400
*To: *<hecnet at update.uu.se>
*ReplyTo: * hecnet at Update.UU.SE
*Subject: *Re: [HECnet] Towards the Mouth of Madness....
Off topic... I received a page, a few weeks prior, on a machine that was
not pinging. Turns out, it was one of a few old NOVA class boxes we
still have at my work, using FDDI for connectivity. Fortunately, a
disconnect / reconnect brought the ring back online; I was scared (and a
bit excited in a strange way) for a few moments that I was going to have
to do some extensive troubleshooting... FDDI still lives.
On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 4:27 PM, H Vlems <hvlems at zonnet.nl
<mailto:hvlems at zonnet.nl>> wrote:
__
Remember what I wrote: this happened nearly two decades ago.____
IP is the protocol that survived and most people aren t even aware
what happened on local area networks before, say,1998.____
I worked for Fuji, photosensitive films, paper and offset printing
products.____
Most of the IT equipment was made by DEC: PDP-11 s (/44, /84, /93,
/24, /73 and /23), VAXes, an IBM mainframe (4081) and PC s.____
And lots of other gear, most of it in the research lab. A Motorola
box that ran Motorola Unix, and an RS/6000 under AIX 2.4 (?).____
The lingua franca was DECnet and LAT. No IP, though some PC s used
Novell and SNA over tokenring to make terminal emulation to the
mainframe possible.____
No IP. Sounds weird in today s world but DECnet eventually
connected everything. We got a **very** early Cisco router that did
level 1____
DECnet routing between the corporate ethernet and the finance dept
token ring. Another (DEC) box that routed DECnet over Datanet/1
(that s X25 in Europe IIRC). The mainframe used an SNA/DECnet
gateway (the big channel attached box).____
The RS/6000 and the Motorola systems also ran DECnet, endnode only.____
To make this a little interesting we ran the first FDDI network in
the Netherlands.____
Trouble shooting wasn t always easy, especially if the SNA/DECnet
gateway was involved!____
Hans____
__ __
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Van:*owner-__hecnet at Update.UU.SE <mailto:hecnet at Update.UU.SE>__
[mailto:owner- <mailto:owner->__hecnet at Update.UU.SE
<mailto:hecnet at Update.UU.SE>__] *Namens *Jason Stevens
*Verzonden:* dinsdag, juli 2011 21:10
*Aan:* hecnet at update.uu.se <mailto:hecnet at update.uu.se>
*Onderwerp:* Re: [HECnet] Towards the Mouth of Madness....____
__ __
AIX and decnet? now that'd be ... non conformist & fun! ____
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Geen virus gevonden in dit bericht.
Gecontroleerd door AVG - www.avg.com <http://www.avg.com>
Versie: 10.0.1388 / Virusdatabase: 1516/3760 - datum van uitgifte:
07/12/11____
Metro ethernet & the move to VIOP on the carrier side killed ATM. But there was a big push from the mid 90's until 2005 or so from what I noticed. LANE was so fun to configure (LECS/LES/BUS/LEC) along with such friendly addressesing... I can't say it'll be missed. But you could get quite creative with it.
What really killed ATM IMHO was our carrier (Bell South) would charge the same price for CBR-RT VBR-RT pvp's as what you would pay for a T1. So they made the technology moot. Esp when you have AT&T G3's (Lucent Avaya etc..) which only deal in T1's it all became a lost cause.
Not to mention cheap & ATM certainly didn't go hand in hand. Esp with the Cisco LS1010.
On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 5:40 PM, <hvlems at zonnet.nl> wrote:
FDDI was great in 1991. It could easily span a large multi building site (> 4 km^2) and with a bandwidth that was better than that of fast ethernet. That didn't exist at the time, 100VG was on the drawing boards. The other alternative was 155 Mb/s ATM but that technology never really took off (in Europe, dunno about the US).
Verzonden vanaf mijn draadloze BlackBerry -toestel
From: Jason Stevens <neozeed at gmail.com>
Sender: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2011 17:31:03 -0400
To: <hecnet at update.uu.se>
ReplyTo: hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Subject: Re: [HECnet] Towards the Mouth of Madness....
FEC (fast ether channel) killed any hopes of FDDI, but it was more so people in certain places that bought into the hopes and dreams of FDDI....
It was also my understanding you needed licenses to make FDDI gear while Ethernet was/is free.
On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 5:29 PM, <hvlems at zonnet.nl> wrote:
It took HP until 2006 to replace the FDDI lan with ethernet technolgy. The fault tolerance of FDDI and the build quality of DEC's gigaswitch products.
The bandwidth of FDDI is a lot better than fast ethernet.
Hans
Verzonden vanaf mijn draadloze BlackBerry -toestel
From: Joe Ferraro <jferraro at gmail.com>
Sender: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2011 17:12:02 -0400
To: <hecnet at update.uu.se>
ReplyTo: hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Subject: Re: [HECnet] Towards the Mouth of Madness....
Off topic... I received a page, a few weeks prior, on a machine that was not pinging. Turns out, it was one of a few old NOVA class boxes we still have at my work, using FDDI for connectivity. Fortunately, a disconnect / reconnect brought the ring back online; I was scared (and a bit excited in a strange way) for a few moments that I was going to have to do some extensive troubleshooting... FDDI still lives.
On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 4:27 PM, H Vlems <hvlems at zonnet.nl> wrote:
Remember what I wrote: this happened nearly two decades ago.
IP is the protocol that survived and most people aren t even aware what happened on local area networks before, say,1998.
I worked for Fuji, photosensitive films, paper and offset printing products.
Most of the IT equipment was made by DEC: PDP-11 s (/44, /84, /93, /24, /73 and /23), VAXes, an IBM mainframe (4081) and PC s.
And lots of other gear, most of it in the research lab. A Motorola box that ran Motorola Unix, and an RS/6000 under AIX 2.4 (?).
The lingua franca was DECnet and LAT. No IP, though some PC s used Novell and SNA over tokenring to make terminal emulation to the mainframe possible.
No IP. Sounds weird in today s world but DECnet eventually connected everything. We got a *very* early Cisco router that did level 1
DECnet routing between the corporate ethernet and the finance dept token ring. Another (DEC) box that routed DECnet over Datanet/1 (that s X25 in Europe IIRC). The mainframe used an SNA/DECnet gateway (the big channel attached box).
The RS/6000 and the Motorola systems also ran DECnet, endnode only.
To make this a little interesting we ran the first FDDI network in the Netherlands.
Trouble shooting wasn t always easy, especially if the SNA/DECnet gateway was involved!
Hans
Van: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE [mailto:owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE] Namens Jason Stevens Verzonden: dinsdag, juli 2011 21:10 Aan: hecnet at update.uu.se Onderwerp: Re: [HECnet] Towards the Mouth of Madness....
AIX and decnet? now that'd be ... non conformist & fun!
Geen virus gevonden in dit bericht. Gecontroleerd door AVG - www.avg.com Versie: 10.0.1388 / Virusdatabase: 1516/3760 - datum van uitgifte: 07/12/11
