HECnet

hecnet@lists.dfupdate.se

6 participants
15595 discussions

by bqt＠softjar.se

I just noticed that something is acting up on the bridge. I have adjacency coming and going, and dumping the bridge hashes, I can see connections moving around in weird ways. I'm trying to pinpoint where the problem is right now... Expect some possible unstability on the bridge at the moment. 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

13 years, 8 months

"Poor mans routing" and the Italian Hobbyist DECNET

by HECNET＠beyondthepale.ie

Kari wrote: On 28.6.2012 23:28, Rok Vidmar wrote: I don't think that will work. How about a bridge translating HECnet's area 1 to an area unused in Italian net and translating Italian area 1 to an unused area in HECnet? -- Regards, Rok . That's exactly what an ATG (Address Translation Gateway) does. Although I haven't used it over TCP/IP (Internet in this case). Maybe it would work if it is configured in either end of a GRE tunnel. Could be worth testing. I can't find my Cisco manual but I've gone looking for suitable configuration commands on my router and I found: decnet map N.H <0-3> N.H Establish an ATG address mapping The first N.H is described as "Local virtual DECnet address" The number between 0 and 3 is the "Remote ATG network number" The second N.H is described as "Remote real DECnet address" I also find that it is possible to apply: decnet <0-3> ATG network number to each interface and it can also be applied globally. Presumably my current decnet configuration defaults everything to being in ATG network number 0. Can you describe how this can be used to map addresses between conflicting areas? Alternatively, if someone on the Italian network or a test network isolated from hecnet is willing to set up another tunnel to me, I am willing to have a go and see if I can get it to work. The commands available seem to suggest an individual mapping is required for every host. Is it also possible to map a whole area with a single mapping? Regards, Peter Coghlan.

13 years, 8 months

"Poor mans routing" and the Italian Hobbyist DECNET

by bqt＠softjar.se

On 2012-06-29 01:37, Steve Davidson wrote: PMR works great with hidden areas! If the Italian network went to a hidden network, then we could designate a router to deal with the connection between the two of them. In our current scheme they would have to go to either area 63 (currently used for this kind of thing - on a site-by-site basis) or free up area 62 and define max area to be something less then whichever area number we chose. If we get them to renumber, they might as well renumber to any "public" area... Johnny -Steve -----Original Message----- From: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE [mailto:owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE] On Behalf Of Sampsa Laine Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2012 09:57 To: hecnet at Update.UU.SE Subject: [HECnet] "Poor mans routing" and the Italian Hobbyist DECNET Guys, Do you think it would be possible to have a host that would somehow bridge HECnet with the Italian DECNET and then use the "poor mans routing" (i.e. HOST1::HOST2::<object) to pass e.g. mail across our two networks? I have no idea how this works in practice, but just throwing the idea out there. From what I understood is that the Italians use many of the same nets / nodes as us (mainly network 1) which would make a network merger impractical. Sampsa -- 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

13 years, 8 months

"Poor mans routing" and the Italian Hobbyist DECNET

by bqt＠softjar.se

On 2012-06-28 22:28, Rok Vidmar wrote: I don't think that will work. How about a bridge translating HECnet's area 1 to an area unused in Italian net and translating Italian area 1 to an unused area in HECnet? Hmm. Problem is that node numbers travel around in so many places in packets that it will be rather difficult to get them all. You have the MAC addresses, but also routing vectors for both level one and level 2, and in addition there are probably other places where node numbers occur in different protocols. They definitely occur in several places in the NICE protocol. If someone wants to try to do this, I'll happily cheer him on, but I fear it will never work correctly... 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

13 years, 8 months

"Poor mans routing" and the Italian Hobbyist DECNET

by jeep＠scshome.net

What I should have said was... They could go that way, but if they are going to change their area number anyway, then why not pick one that is unused and link to that. A Multinet tunnel would be perfect in this case. -Steve From: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE [mailto:owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE] On Behalf Of Sampsa Laine Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2012 19:36 To: hecnet at Update.UU.SE Subject: Re: [HECnet] "Poor mans routing" and the Italian Hobbyist DECNET On 29 Jun 2012, at 02:37, Steve Davidson wrote: PMR works great with hidden areas! If the Italian network went to a hidden network, then we could designate a router to deal with the connection between the two of them. In our current scheme they would have to go to either area 63 (currently used for this kind of thing - on a site-by-site basis) or free up area 62 and define max area to be something less then whichever area number we chose. -Steve So now we just need to get them to buy into this nutty scheme, right? Sampsa

13 years, 8 months

"Poor mans routing" and the Italian Hobbyist DECNET

by jeep＠scshome.net

YUP! From: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE [mailto:owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE] On Behalf Of Sampsa Laine Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2012 19:36 To: hecnet at Update.UU.SE Subject: Re: [HECnet] "Poor mans routing" and the Italian Hobbyist DECNET On 29 Jun 2012, at 02:37, Steve Davidson wrote: PMR works great with hidden areas! If the Italian network went to a hidden network, then we could designate a router to deal with the connection between the two of them. In our current scheme they would have to go to either area 63 (currently used for this kind of thing - on a site-by-site basis) or free up area 62 and define max area to be something less then whichever area number we chose. -Steve So now we just need to get them to buy into this nutty scheme, right? Sampsa

13 years, 8 months

"Poor mans routing" and the Italian Hobbyist DECNET

by jeep＠scshome.net

PMR works great with hidden areas! If the Italian network went to a hidden network, then we could designate a router to deal with the connection between the two of them. In our current scheme they would have to go to either area 63 (currently used for this kind of thing - on a site-by-site basis) or free up area 62 and define max area to be something less then whichever area number we chose. -Steve -----Original Message----- From: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE [mailto:owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE] On Behalf Of Sampsa Laine Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2012 09:57 To: hecnet at Update.UU.SE Subject: [HECnet] "Poor mans routing" and the Italian Hobbyist DECNET Guys, Do you think it would be possible to have a host that would somehow bridge HECnet with the Italian DECNET and then use the "poor mans routing" (i.e. HOST1::HOST2::<object) to pass e.g. mail across our two networks? I have no idea how this works in practice, but just throwing the idea out there. From what I understood is that the Italians use many of the same nets / nodes as us (mainly network 1) which would make a network merger impractical. Sampsa

13 years, 8 months

"Poor mans routing" and the Italian Hobbyist DECNET

by sampsa＠mac.com

On 29 Jun 2012, at 02:37, Steve Davidson wrote: PMR works great with hidden areas! If the Italian network went to a hidden network, then we could designate a router to deal with the connection between the two of them. In our current scheme they would have to go to either area 63 (currently used for this kind of thing - on a site-by-site basis) or free up area 62 and define max area to be something less then whichever area number we chose. -Steve So now we just need to get them to buy into this nutty scheme, right? Sampsa

13 years, 8 months

"Poor mans routing" and the Italian Hobbyist DECNET

by robert.jarratt＠ntlworld.com

-----Original Message----- From: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE [mailto:owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE] On Behalf Of Kari Uusim ki Sent: 28 June 2012 22:01 To: hecnet at Update.UU.SE Subject: Re: [HECnet] "Poor mans routing" and the Italian Hobbyist DECNET On 28.6.2012 23:28, Rok Vidmar wrote: I don't think that will work. How about a bridge translating HECnet's area 1 to an area unused in Italian net and translating Italian area 1 to an unused area in HECnet? -- Regards, Rok . That's exactly what an ATG (Address Translation Gateway) does. Although I haven't used it over TCP/IP (Internet in this case). Maybe it would work if it is configured in either end of a GRE tunnel. Could be worth testing. Kari I have started a bit of work to create a user mode DECnet router and I am sure that this functionality could be added at some point. I will certainly consider it as I progress. But progress is not going to be quick. Regards Rob

13 years, 8 months

SimH, Ultrix and DECnet

by tonyblews＠gmail.com

I'll have a try... i'm sure to have a 5.25 drive around here somewhere. Anyway back to the Ultrix/DECnet marlarkey. I found an image of a decnet tape, but i ran into the old PAK problem. So its installed, but won't work. Any idea on a way round this? Or should I just be content that TCP/IP works on it, and move on to something else... Linux DECnet on a Pi is high on my hitlist at the moment. On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 12:13 AM, Sampsa Laine <sampsa at mac.com> wrote: Can you DD the disks? I'd love a play :) Sampsa On 29 Jun 2012, at 00:16, Tony Blews wrote: The boxes say SCO Interactive. For the x386 platform. Its raining its arse off at the moment, and I don't want to get wet going to the shed. On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 10:58 PM, Jason Stevens <neozeed at gmail.com> wrote: On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 6:26 AM, Tony Blews <tonyblews at gmail.com> wrote: Ultrix not liking the year 2000 means you need to be preposterous, sadly. Slightly related: while poking around in the shed looking for a spare kettle lead, I found a shrink-wrapped copy of SCO Unix on 5.25" disks and a copy of the "Unix for VMS Users" book. I've moved house 7 times in the last 20 years. Why do i keep this crap? What version of SCO Unix...?

13 years, 8 months

Jump to page:

2026

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

HECnet