.BEGIN-HECNET-INFO
ADDR |NAME |OWNER |EMAIL |HARDWARE |OS |LOCATION |NOTES
8.401|CHIMPY|Sampsa Laine |sampsa at mac.com |AlphaServer DS10 |OpenVMS 8.3 |London, England |Main SAMPSACOM system, SMTP gateway (CHIMPYMAIL.COM)
8.400|GORVAX|Sampsa Laine |sampsa at mac.com |SIMH VAX on OSX/Intel |OpenVMS 7.3 |London, England |MULTINET bridge to Area 2, Area router
8.403|RHESUS|Sampsa Laine |sampsa at mac.com |HP rx2600 Dual 900MHz |OpenVMS 8.4E |London, England |File libraries available
8.500|PYFFLE|Sampsa Laine |system at pyffle.com|VMWare |Pyffle BBS |London, England |Waffle reimplementation BBS, log in as pyffle for access
.END-HECNET-INFO
On 18 May 2013, at 23:10, Sampsa Laine <sampsa at mac.com> wrote:
Always doable, just pick one box per area.
As for easy to scrape, we had a pretty well-defined format for where the machine readable stuff starts (the content is just CSV, more or less) and ends.
How much easier do you want it? :)
sampsa
On 18 May 2013, at 23:08, Johnny Billquist <bqt at softjar.se> wrote:
On 2013-05-18 22:58, Sampsa Laine wrote:
On 18 May 2013, at 18:41, Johnny Billquist <bqt at softjar.se> wrote:
Or I could possible scrape files in know locations to manage the updating, if that would make more sense. (The last one would probably be really easy from my point of view...)
Johnny
Didn't we develop a format for this ages ago, to be stuck at the end of INFO.TXT on the public accessible dir of a machine?
I don't think the current INFO.TXT files are that useful, or even easy to scrape. But that might just be me. :-)
Not to mention that I have no clue which machines to scrape, if I were to do that. If I were to do it, I'd probably ask for a different format, and have a designated machine per person/area to scrape.
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
Circuit TCP-0-0, Adjacent node address out of range
Packet beginning = 0101800640020200002C0100FC010200
Both have maximum area set to 63, maximum node set to 1023, and both are routing IV.
What could I be missing?
The packet beginning shows node type = Level 1 router. So the area number is supposed to match, and it doesn't.
Isn't ROUTING IV level 2 router? EXEC TYPE is defined as that...or it
should be anyway.
Oh. Misread the HELP page. I wanted AREA not ROUTING.
paul
--
Cory Smelosky
http://gewt.net/ Personal stuff
http://gimme-sympathy.org Experiments
--
Cory Smelosky
http://gewt.net/ Personal stuff
http://gimme-sympathy.org Experiments
Circuit TCP-0-0, Adjacent node address out of range
Packet beginning = 0101800640020200002C0100FC010200
Both have maximum area set to 63, maximum node set to 1023, and both are routing IV.
What could I be missing?
The packet beginning shows node type = Level 1 router. So the area number is supposed to match, and it doesn't.
Isn't ROUTING IV level 2 router? EXEC TYPE is defined as that...or it should be anyway.
paul
--
Cory Smelosky
http://gewt.net/ Personal stuff
http://gimme-sympathy.org Experiments
Circuit TCP-0-0, Adjacent node address out of range
Packet beginning = 0101800640020200002C0100FC010200
Both have maximum area set to 63, maximum node set to 1023, and both are routing IV.
What could I be missing?
The packet beginning shows node type = Level 1 router. So the area number is supposed to match, and it doesn't.
paul
Circuit TCP-0-0, Adjacent node address out of range
Packet beginning = 0101800640020200002C0100FC010200
Both have maximum area set to 63, maximum node set to 1023, and both are routing IV.
What could I be missing?
--
Cory Smelosky
http://gewt.net/ Personal stuff
http://gimme-sympathy.org Experiments
node = 7.61 (BITXOO)
NCP>
%%%%%%%%%%% OPCOM 1-MAY-2013 18:46:32.05 %%%%%%%%%%%
Message from user DECNET on BITXR1
DECnet event 4.7, circuit down, circuit fault From node 7.92 (BITXR1), 1-MAY-
2013 18:46:32.05
Circuit TX-1-7, Line synchronization lost
My setup is as follows:
7.92 (experimental machine):
sim> show vh
VH address=20000140-2000017F*, vector=2C8-2E4*, lines=32, 4 units
VH0 attached to
32011,Line=15,Connect=192.168.0.8:32024;notelnet,32024;notelnet, DHV
mode, 1 connection
VH1 DHV mode
VH2 DHV mode
VH3 DHV mode
BITXOO:
sim> show vh
VH address=2013E140-2013E14F*, vector=E8-EC*, lines=16
attached to
32023,Line=15,Connect=192.168.0.2:32024;notelnet,32024;notelnet, DHU
mode, Modem
Hangup, 2 connections
sim>
BITXOO is running VMS 4.7, and it is a simulated 780. The other machine is
running 7.3 and it is a virtual 3900...
Anyone has been succesful setting this thing up?
Hmmm... I've tested this with DZ devices on windows hosts and not seen circuits popping up and down...
I would work with the DZ device first. It has been tested and had its modem related behaviors more solidly verified.
By the way, you shouldn't need to disable telnet as long as you have the telnet setting the same on both ends of the connection (i.e. notelnet<->notelnet or telnet<->telnet). The telnet setup we are using provides an 8 bit clean binary telnet channel.
I would make sure that you've have MODEM and HANGUP settings enabled on both ends (from the simh perspective).
What do you have for /MODEM and /HANGUP settings on the VMS ports?
If you can confirm good behavior on the DZ devices and bad on the VH we can explore why...
- Mark
Circuit TX-1-7, Line synchronization lost
My setup is as follows:
7.92 (experimental machine):
sim> show vh
VH address=20000140-2000017F*, vector=2C8-2E4*, lines=32, 4 units
VH0 attached to 32011,Line=15,Connect=192.168.0.8:32024;notelnet,32024;notelnet, DHV mode, 1 connection
VH1 DHV mode
VH2 DHV mode
VH3 DHV mode
BITXOO:
sim> show vh
VH address=2013E140-2013E14F*, vector=E8-EC*, lines=16
attached to 32023,Line=15,Connect=192.168.0.2:32024;notelnet,32024;notelnet, DHU mode, Modem
Hangup, 2 connections
sim>
BITXOO is running VMS 4.7, and it is a simulated 780. The other machine is running 7.3 and it is a virtual 3900...
Anyone has been succesful setting this thing up?
Jordi Guillaumes i Pons
jg at jordi.guillaumes.name
HECnet: BITXOV::JGUILLAUMES
I was able to find DECNET-20 documentation which is unfortunately not what you're looking for. ;(
(BTW the "buffered console" feature in 4.0 is also awesome, specially to run headless simulators. Now if we could do an unattended RSX boot it would be wonderful!).
Yes, an unattended RSX boot WOULD be nice. ;)
--
Cory Smelosky
http://gewt.net/ Personal stuff!
http://gimme-sympathy.org/ My permanently-a-work-in-progress pet project.
