Does anyone have media for a Digital or Oracle version of RDB for a VAX
running VMS 7.3?
I've got some RDB files from 2000 and 2005. I'm not sure what they are as I don't recognize the names any longer, but you're welcome to take a look at them. They are in DUSTY::.
The RDBV71431KIT_AMV.ZIP is the 2005 file, all the others are from 2000.
--Marc
Hi Guys,
Does anyone have media for a Digital or Oracle version of RDB for a VAX
running VMS 7.3?
The Oracle website provides downloads for Alpha and Itanium, but not
VAX.
Thanks, Mark.
On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 08:12:11AM +0100, Mark Wickens wrote:
Not sure how much interest will be generated long term, but there were a
few people who'd heard of hecnet and a few who said they'd like to get a
machine up and running on it.
Although I didn't manage to chat to you while I was there, yours was by far
my favourite stand at VCF UK. It was great to come across some VAXen in a
sea of home computers (which don't really interest me a great deal, to be
honest). I was rather amused to see two guys wondering why Unix commands
weren't working on an OpenVMS system :)
I've been subscribed to this list for years and seeing your machines has
finally given me the kick I need to dig out a VAX, reinstall OpenVMS and
get connected to HECNET.
(Resending this as I don't think my original reply got through due to using
an address not subscribed to the list).
-mj
--
Michael-John Turner
mj at mjturner.net <> http://mjturner.net/
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 05:52:35AM +0100, Mark Wickens wrote:
Hi,
I'm currently experiencing issues with the connection between my bridge
and psilo.update.uu.se:4711 - are there any known issues?
Regards, Mark.
Hi All
We had a wierd case of SATA controller problems that took the server
down and it refused to boot. Getting a new controller took a day, but
since about 22:00 yesterday the machine is back up.
I wish I could report on these things when it happens, but my mail and
this mailing list is running on that machine :)
Regards,
Pontus
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 05:17:58PM -0700, Johnny Billquist wrote:
It seems Psilo had rebooted. Bridge have been restarted. (Yes, I know, I
should set things up to it starts automatically... Any year now...)
That reminds me of the last iteration of my home server. Postgresql wasn't
ever setup to automatically start, so every power outage I had to remember
to manually start it.
I fixed it when I replaced that machine with a new one. Now pgsql starts at
boot. YEARS later. :-D
-brian
--
"Coding in C is like sending a 3 year old to do groceries. You gotta
tell them exactly what you want or you'll end up with a cupboard full of
pop tarts and pancake mix." -- IRC User (http://www.bash.org/?841435)
Confirmed, my side is working now..
Sampsa
On 24 Jun 2010, at 01:17, Johnny Billquist wrote:
It seems Psilo had rebooted. Bridge have been restarted. (Yes, I know, I should set things up to it starts automatically... Any year now...)
Johnny
Sampsa Laine wrote:
My bridge connection is down as well..
Sampsa
On 23 Jun 2010, at 05:52, Mark Wickens wrote:
Hi,
I'm currently experiencing issues with the connection between my bridge
and psilo.update.uu.se:4711 - are there any known issues?
Regards, Mark.
It seems Psilo had rebooted. Bridge have been restarted. (Yes, I know, I should set things up to it starts automatically... Any year now...)
Johnny
Sampsa Laine wrote:
My bridge connection is down as well..
Sampsa
On 23 Jun 2010, at 05:52, Mark Wickens wrote:
Hi,
I'm currently experiencing issues with the connection between my bridge
and psilo.update.uu.se:4711 - are there any known issues?
Regards, Mark.
My bridge connection is down as well..
Sampsa
On 23 Jun 2010, at 05:52, Mark Wickens wrote:
Hi,
I'm currently experiencing issues with the connection between my bridge
and psilo.update.uu.se:4711 - are there any known issues?
Regards, Mark.
On Sun, Jun 13, 2010 at 07:50:05AM +0100, Mark Wickens wrote:
I've been talking to Steve Davidson and it crossed my mind that if we
use multinet to connect we won't need a separate unix box as we wouldn't
require Johnny's bridge. Is that correct? Might be worth going through
the motions if you have time, (a) to get the process documented and (b)
to provide a good fallback strategy if option 1 using the bridge to
connect through to you doesn't work.
I know this wasn't meant for the list, but I had some questions anyway. :-D
I've got a new colo server in place which means I could actually run simh on
my colo box (which would be a good machine for a "hub" of some kind) and I
was wondering about the multinet thing myself. I can't get simh its own IP
address, so I would need to do port forwarding to get this to work. Is that
possible? Does the multinet tunneling stuff work over static ports or does it
use dynamic ports?
Also, I would want to setup the bridge as well. Are there any direction on
setting the bridge program up to talk directly to simh?
Thanks!
-brian
--
"Coding in C is like sending a 3 year old to do groceries. You gotta
tell them exactly what you want or you'll end up with a cupboard full of
pop tarts and pancake mix." -- IRC User (http://www.bash.org/?841435)
As Fred has said port 700 is all yo need to deal with Multinet. The bridge
allows you to configure whatever port you need.
Here I run a VS3900 on SIMH on NetBSD as well as the bridge all on one lowly
little P3-667Mhz. I am running a VS4000/VLC with Multinet. The Multinet
box can deal with dynamic IP addresses at the other end, in fact it does so
automatically so it has become noise.
If you need specifics, contact me offline and we can go from there.
-Steve
On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 12:02:30PM -0400, Fred wrote:
Multinet uses port 700/udp. Port forwarding works, as this is how I do
it on area 33.
Ah, excellent! Thanks.
Also, I would want to setup the bridge as well. Are there any direction on
setting the bridge program up to talk directly to simh?
To quote a movie "That's not my area" ... (so I won't comment) :)
Well then, I'll wait for someone who's area it is to answer. :-D
-brian
--
"Coding in C is like sending a 3 year old to do groceries. You gotta
tell them exactly what you want or you'll end up with a cupboard full of
pop tarts and pancake mix." -- IRC User (http://www.bash.org/?841435)
On Tue, 22 Jun 2010, Brian Hechinger wrote:
was wondering about the multinet thing myself. I can't get simh its own IP address, so I would need to do port forwarding to get this to work. Is that possible? Does the multinet tunneling stuff work over static ports or does it use dynamic ports?
Multinet uses port 700/udp. Port forwarding works, as this is how I do it on area 33.
Also, I would want to setup the bridge as well. Are there any direction on
setting the bridge program up to talk directly to simh?
To quote a movie "That's not my area" ... (so I won't comment) :)
Fred
----
Lets call it for what it is - "legacy" is a term that people use in a
polite but derogatory manner to imply that the future direction they
prefer is not that which they view as the current direction.
On Sun, Jun 13, 2010 at 07:50:05AM +0100, Mark Wickens wrote:
I've been talking to Steve Davidson and it crossed my mind that if we
use multinet to connect we won't need a separate unix box as we wouldn't
require Johnny's bridge. Is that correct? Might be worth going through
the motions if you have time, (a) to get the process documented and (b)
to provide a good fallback strategy if option 1 using the bridge to
connect through to you doesn't work.
I know this wasn't meant for the list, but I had some questions anyway. :-D
I've got a new colo server in place which means I could actually run simh on
my colo box (which would be a good machine for a "hub" of some kind) and I
was wondering about the multinet thing myself. I can't get simh its own IP
address, so I would need to do port forwarding to get this to work. Is that
possible? Does the multinet tunneling stuff work over static ports or does it
use dynamic ports?
Also, I would want to setup the bridge as well. Are there any direction on
setting the bridge program up to talk directly to simh?
Thanks!
-brian
--
"Coding in C is like sending a 3 year old to do groceries. You gotta
tell them exactly what you want or you'll end up with a cupboard full of
pop tarts and pancake mix." -- IRC User (http://www.bash.org/?841435)
I did my bit promoting hecnet at the VCF. There are some pictures here:
http://amibay.com/showthread.php?t=7165
If you look carefully you should be able to spot the DIGITAL logo and
hecnet info in one of the images - I'm the one looking pensive at the
thought of being filmed ;)
For the most part the show was dedicated to gaming computers and the BBC
Model B which spanned gaming and education in the UK. One of the stands
had Spectrums modified to communicate over the internet - they were
using a microvax 3100 running openbsd to serve up firmware to the
spectrums (afaik).
Not sure how much interest will be generated long term, but there were a
few people who'd heard of hecnet and a few who said they'd like to get a
machine up and running on it.
The BBC programme 'Click' is due to air on 2nd July and will have a
segment about VCF UK.
Regards, Mark
There's some issues connecting to Johnny unfortunately...
Sampsa
On 17 Jun 2010, at 22:12, Mark Wickens wrote:
On Thu, 2010-06-17 at 22:06 +0100, Sampsa Laine wrote:
Yeah, I'll be around, my mobile is 07961 149465
On 17 Jun 2010, at 21:34, Mark Wickens wrote:
Hi Sampsa,
Are you going to be about tomorrow afternoon to try and setup a hecnet
bridge from the national museum of computing to your network? Let me
know one way or another, cheers. Mobile is 07917 653012.
Regards, Mark.
Is hecnet ok from your perspective at the moment?
On Thu, 2010-06-17 at 22:06 +0100, Sampsa Laine wrote:
Yeah, I'll be around, my mobile is 07961 149465
On 17 Jun 2010, at 21:34, Mark Wickens wrote:
Hi Sampsa,
Are you going to be about tomorrow afternoon to try and setup a hecnet
bridge from the national museum of computing to your network? Let me
know one way or another, cheers. Mobile is 07917 653012.
Regards, Mark.
Is hecnet ok from your perspective at the moment?
Yeah, I'll be around, my mobile is 07961 149465
On 17 Jun 2010, at 21:34, Mark Wickens wrote:
Hi Sampsa,
Are you going to be about tomorrow afternoon to try and setup a hecnet
bridge from the national museum of computing to your network? Let me
know one way or another, cheers. Mobile is 07917 653012.
Regards, Mark.
Hi Sampsa,
Are you going to be about tomorrow afternoon to try and setup a hecnet
bridge from the national museum of computing to your network? Let me
know one way or another, cheers. Mobile is 07917 653012.
Regards, Mark.
Hi Chrissie,
If you are still on for me picking up your unwanted computers could you
please email me your address and telephone number.
I'll probably end up setting off here at about 9am so would be with you
late morning.
Regards, Mark.
Sampsa,
Once they connect they can do a traceroute, get their address and pass it along
to whomever at the other end. The configuration for either the bridge or
Multinet is trivial. You can preconfigure the bridge and comment it out until
a valid address is known, and with Multinet you can preconfigure the entry with
a bogus entry (address invalid only) and apply the change when you have it. A
quick reboot and you are all done.
Do you think that their address will change more than once during this short
event?
-Steve
Well static and static, but I mean there must be an IP address for
configuration of our side as the original MULTINET stack's UDP tunnel
does not to DNS lookups...
Sampsa
On 13 Jun 2010, at 16:07, Steve Davidson wrote:
Actually, for this short duration, who cares about a static
address. Fred and
I use dedicated VS4000/VLC's as Multinet tunnel routers. We reboot as
necessary and ignore everyone's complaints. SG1 actually has a
script that
deals with some of this automatically. If I have time today I may
even finish
it. It deals with the burden of changing the address entry in
Multinet and
reboots. Total turn-around is under 5 minutes, actually more like 3
minutes.
I noticed that Johnny has made changes to the bridge. I do not have
these
changes. My version is different than his to begin with. Fred and
I run
my version but it could probably use Johnny's fixes. I'm now
wondering if
some of the "surprises" we have been running into have to do with
these
"fixes". Do either of you know? I have not approached Johnny about
getting
these changes.
-Steve
Yup, that's correct.
Now we will need a static IP to make this work, unless we set up my
end on a Linux box - the MULTINET Linux port knows how to look up
hostnames, the original VMS one needs a static IP.
Steve is right about the bridge and LAT however, we COULD set up the
bridge as a backup and try the MULTINET tunnel as a primary method of
connection.
Sampsa
On 13 Jun 2010, at 07:50, Mark Wickens wrote:
I've been talking to Steve Davidson and it crossed my mind that if
we
use multinet to connect we won't need a separate unix box as we
wouldn't
require Johnny's bridge. Is that correct? Might be worth going
through
the motions if you have time, (a) to get the process documented and
(b)
to provide a good fallback strategy if option 1 using the bridge to
connect through to you doesn't work.
Regards, Mark.
Well static and static, but I mean there must be an IP address for configuration of our side as the original MULTINET stack's UDP tunnel does not to DNS lookups...
Sampsa
On 13 Jun 2010, at 16:07, Steve Davidson wrote:
Actually, for this short duration, who cares about a static address. Fred and
I use dedicated VS4000/VLC's as Multinet tunnel routers. We reboot as
necessary and ignore everyone's complaints. SG1 actually has a script that
deals with some of this automatically. If I have time today I may even finish
it. It deals with the burden of changing the address entry in Multinet and
reboots. Total turn-around is under 5 minutes, actually more like 3 minutes.
I noticed that Johnny has made changes to the bridge. I do not have these
changes. My version is different than his to begin with. Fred and I run
my version but it could probably use Johnny's fixes. I'm now wondering if
some of the "surprises" we have been running into have to do with these
"fixes". Do either of you know? I have not approached Johnny about getting
these changes.
-Steve
Yup, that's correct.
Now we will need a static IP to make this work, unless we set up my
end on a Linux box - the MULTINET Linux port knows how to look up
hostnames, the original VMS one needs a static IP.
Steve is right about the bridge and LAT however, we COULD set up the
bridge as a backup and try the MULTINET tunnel as a primary method of
connection.
Sampsa
On 13 Jun 2010, at 07:50, Mark Wickens wrote:
I've been talking to Steve Davidson and it crossed my mind that if we
use multinet to connect we won't need a separate unix box as we
wouldn't
require Johnny's bridge. Is that correct? Might be worth going through
the motions if you have time, (a) to get the process documented and
(b)
to provide a good fallback strategy if option 1 using the bridge to
connect through to you doesn't work.
Regards, Mark.
Actually, for this short duration, who cares about a static address. Fred and
I use dedicated VS4000/VLC's as Multinet tunnel routers. We reboot as
necessary and ignore everyone's complaints. SG1 actually has a script that
deals with some of this automatically. If I have time today I may even finish
it. It deals with the burden of changing the address entry in Multinet and
reboots. Total turn-around is under 5 minutes, actually more like 3 minutes.
I noticed that Johnny has made changes to the bridge. I do not have these
changes. My version is different than his to begin with. Fred and I run
my version but it could probably use Johnny's fixes. I'm now wondering if
some of the "surprises" we have been running into have to do with these
"fixes". Do either of you know? I have not approached Johnny about getting
these changes.
-Steve
Yup, that's correct.
Now we will need a static IP to make this work, unless we set up my
end on a Linux box - the MULTINET Linux port knows how to look up
hostnames, the original VMS one needs a static IP.
Steve is right about the bridge and LAT however, we COULD set up the
bridge as a backup and try the MULTINET tunnel as a primary method of
connection.
Sampsa
On 13 Jun 2010, at 07:50, Mark Wickens wrote:
I've been talking to Steve Davidson and it crossed my mind that if we
use multinet to connect we won't need a separate unix box as we
wouldn't
require Johnny's bridge. Is that correct? Might be worth going through
the motions if you have time, (a) to get the process documented and
(b)
to provide a good fallback strategy if option 1 using the bridge to
connect through to you doesn't work.
Regards, Mark.
Yup, that's correct.
Now we will need a static IP to make this work, unless we set up my end on a Linux box - the MULTINET Linux port knows how to look up hostnames, the original VMS one needs a static IP.
Steve is right about the bridge and LAT however, we COULD set up the bridge as a backup and try the MULTINET tunnel as a primary method of connection.
Sampsa
On 13 Jun 2010, at 07:50, Mark Wickens wrote:
I've been talking to Steve Davidson and it crossed my mind that if we
use multinet to connect we won't need a separate unix box as we wouldn't
require Johnny's bridge. Is that correct? Might be worth going through
the motions if you have time, (a) to get the process documented and (b)
to provide a good fallback strategy if option 1 using the bridge to
connect through to you doesn't work.
Regards, Mark.
On Sun, Jun 13, 2010 at 2:56 AM, Mark Wickens <mark at wickensonline.co.uk> wrote:
On Sun, 2010-06-13 at 07:50 +0100, Mark Wickens wrote:
I've been talking to Steve Davidson and it crossed my mind that if we
use multinet to connect we won't need a separate unix box as we wouldn't
require Johnny's bridge. Is that correct? Might be worth going through
the motions if you have time, (a) to get the process documented and (b)
to provide a good fallback strategy if option 1 using the bridge to
connect through to you doesn't work.
Regards, Mark.
Sorry, that was meant for Sampsa. Wickens steps into the bear trap by
mistake...
Hello!
But Mark you don't look like the Road Runner? I had Wile Coyote setup
that bear trap.
And you're not him since his traps always trap him.
-----
Gregg C Levine gregg.drwho8 at gmail.com
"This signature fought the Time Wars, time and again."
